In Misc. Application No.168/2022, the Dr. Tribunal Delhi refused the applicant's request for a direction to the DRT to decide a pending special application in a time-bound manner, dismissing the application.
Prayer for direction to DRT to decide the main application in a time-bound manner was dismissed.
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.
DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI
Misc. Application No.168/2022 Arising out of S.A.No.358/2022 (DRT-II, Delhi)
Kailash Chand Jain Vs Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. & Ors
21.12.2022 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Brijesh Sethi
Present: Ms. Pratiti Rungta, Ld. counsel for applicant
This matter has been taken up by me through Video Conferencing.
This is an application seeking direction to the learned DRT-II, Delhi to take up the S.A. No.358/2022 and decide the prayer of the appellant for interim relief in a time bound manner.
Heard. Directions have been issued to the learned DRT to decide the cases expeditiously in a number of matters. Therefore, the prayer of the applicant herein for direction to learned DRT to decide his case in a time-bound manner cannot be acceded to at present. The application is dismissed.
File be consigned to record.
(CHAIRPERSON)
-pk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to directions for the DRT to decide the main application in a time-bound manner.
Whether a direction for time-bound disposal of S.A. No.358/2022 by the DRT should be issued to Delhi.
Kailash Chand Jain
Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd.
Brijesh Sethi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
