In a miscellaneous appeal before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal for default due to the appellant's absence and lack of representation, assuming the appellant was not keen on prosecuting the appeal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson Misc. Appeal No. 233/2012
Between
Nikhilesh K Jhaveri … Appellant/s V/s. Central Bank of India &Ors. …Respondent/s Mr Ismail Nasikwala, Advocate for Respondent No.9.
-: Order dated: 30/08/2022:-
The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant has submitted no instructions on 11.07.2022, after intimating the Appellant. Time was granted to the Appellant to engage another counsel.
When the matter was taken up today, there is no representation for the Appellant.
I assume that the Appellant is not keen on prosecuting this Appeal. Hence, the Appeal is dismissed for default.
All Miscellaneous Applications, if any, are dismissed as infructuous.
Sd/Chairperson
mks-23
1
Nikhilesh K Jhaveri
Central Bank of India & Ors.
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
