Disposed

Ramesh kanhayalal Bathija v. Punjab National Bank

DRAT14 Nov 2022MISC APPLICATION/27/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal restored an appeal dismissed for default. Noting the counsel's irregular appearances, the court imposed a ₹20,000 cost before allowing the matter to be disposed of on merits.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was restored to the file with an imposition of a cost of ₹20,000/- to be paid to the D.R.T. Bar Associates within one week.

Ramesh kanhayalal Bathija versus Punjab National Bank — Civil Procedure and Limitation | DRAT (2022)

¶1

BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson M.A. No. 27/2022 (Restoration) In

¶2

(Misc. Appeal No. 217/2012- Disposed of)

¶3

Between

¶4

Ramesh Kanhayalal Bathija … Appellant/s V/s. Punjab National Bank …Respondent/s

¶5

Mr Dharmendra D. Jadhav, Advocate for Appellant.

¶6

Ms Tejashree Chaudhari, i/b M/s. Intralegal, Advocate for Respondent No.1

¶7

-: Order dated: 14/11/2022:-

¶8

Misc. Appeal No. 217/2022 was posted for a hearing time and again.

¶9

The Appellant was not regular in appearing. Ultimately, on 05.04.2022 the counsel for the Appellant requested for an adjournment in the matter, and Appeal was posted for hearing on 15.06.2022 as a last chance.

¶10

However on that date also the counsel for the Appellant was not present for the hearing and therefore, the Appeal was dismissed for default.

¶11

The Respondent was present throughout and even ready for the hearing. This is an application for restoration of that Appeal which was dismissed for default.

¶12

¶13

The learned counsel for the Appellant submits that there was some miscommunication with the client, and the officer who was in charge of conducting the Appeal was also affected by Covid-19 and therefore, could not contact the counsel. In case the client could not contact the counsel and there was no instruction was received, it was for the counsel to report no instructions.

¶14

In the instant case, the counsel for the Appellant has absented himself which goes to show that the Appellant was not keen on prosecuting the Appeal.

¶15

However, taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances in this case and the facts that the application for restoration has been filed within a week, I am of the opinion that the Appeal has to be disposed of on merits.

¶16

However, for the latches on the part of the Appellant in prosecuting the Appeal diligently, a cost will have to be imposed. The Appellant is directed to pay a cost of ₹ 20,000/- to the D.R.T. Bar Associates, Mumbai within the period of one week for the purchase of books and periodicals, failing which an application stands dismissed without any further reference to this Tribunal.

¶17

In case of compliance, post on 07.12.2022 before the Registrar.

¶18

psa-10

¶19

Ramesh kanhayalal Bathija v. Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh kanhayalal Bathija v. Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ifci Ltd. versus Rainbow Papers Ltd.

Central Bank of India versus Shri Akash Mathuradas Deshmukh and Anr.

Pravin Haridas Kantaria & Ors. versus the Mahanagar Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Srei Equipment Finance Limited versus Nirmal Lifestyle Limited and Ors.

Axis Finance Ltd. versus Umesh Shrikant Sawant

Central Bank of India versus Upendra Pravinbhai Patel and Anr.