This bench of the DRAT at Mumbai, while the appellant's counsel requested adjournment citing personal inconvenience, adjourned the matter to 14.09.2022, ordered parties to prepare, and continued the status quo order.
Adjourned to 14.09.2022; status quo order continued.
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.60/2022
Between
Parvati Pingale & Ors. … Appellant/s V/s. Bank of Baroda & Ors. …Respondent/s
Ms Amita Chaware, Advocate for Appellants.
Mr Sachin Fuladi, Advocate for Respondent No.1
Mr Radhe Agrawal, i/b Mr Atul Pande, Advocate for Respondent No 2 & 3.
-: Order dated: 26/08/2022:-
The Ld. Counsel representing the Counsel for the Appellants submits that due to personal inconvenience he has not been able to come from Nagpur for attending the matter and seeks adjournment.
The Ld. Counsel appearing for Respondents No. 2 & 3 is also not present for the hearing.
The parties are directed to get ready for a hearing on the next date, positively.
Post the matter on 14.09.2022 for hearing.
The status quo order shall continue till then.
Sd/Chairperson
mks-25
1
Parvati Pingale & Ors.
Bank of Baroda & Ors.
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
6 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
