Mr. Manish Lalwani (Jain) & Ors. versus State Bank of India

Heard the Ld. Counsel for the Appellants on the Misc. Application which has been filed for condonation of delay of 84 days in filing the Appeal. The Appellants are before this Tribunal challenging the restraining order passed by D.R.T. during the pendency of the O.A. filed by Respondent Bank. The Appellants state in the application and accompanying affidavit that initially they did not intend to challenge the order but there is some inconvenience caused because of the restraining order passed by D.R.T. with respect to their travelabroad. It is also submitted that such an order is not legally sustainable and hence by the time the Appellant made up their mind to challenge the impugned order there is a delay of 84 days.

The Respondent has filed an objection stating that the reason stated for condoning the delay is not sufficient and therefore, vehemently opposed the application for condoning the delay.

1

Upon going through the application and the accompanying affidavit, I am convinced that the delay of 84 days has been explained properly and, therefore, there is no reason to decline the application for condoning the delay. The application is, therefore, allowed and the delay of 84 days in filing the Misc. Appeal is condoned.

The Registry has already taken the Misc. Appeal on file and hence, the matter shall be posted for filing a reply on Misc. Appeal with advance copy to the other side.

Sd/Chairperson

mks-18

2

Mr. Manish Lalwani (Jain) & Ors. v. State Bank of India