Pawan Kumar Jaiswal v. U C O Bank and Anr.

IA No. 60/2022 and 145/2022 in Appeal Dy. No. 127/2022 Date: 28.06.2022

Pawan Kumar Jaiswal Vs. UCO Bank and Anr.

Present: Shri Utkarsh Srivastava, counsel for the appellant, Shri Jagjeet Singh, counsel for the respondent-Bank, Shri Mayank Srivastava, counsel for the respondent-Auction Purchaser,

On the basis of the urgency application filed by the appellant, the case has been taken-up today.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that he had filed his reply and whatever was required to be filed before the DRT, Allahabad in time, but on account of circumstances beyond control and intervening covid period, the matter could not be heard. It is further contended on behalf of the appellant that the appellant did not seek any adjournment and even on 05.04.2022 the matter was listed before the DRT, Allahabad on account of I.A. being filed on behalf of the respondent-Bank regarding urgency. The said order dated 05.04.2022 further records that the amendment application is also pending, which was duly considered by the DRT, but the prayer for extending the status quo order, which was in operation for more than a year, was declined solely on the ground that the pleadings are complete in the matter. The said order does not indicate that any adjournment was sought on behalf of the appellant for not arguing the matter on 05.04.2022.

The learned counsel for the appellant also contends that although the stay vacation application filed by the respondent-Bank is still pending consideration before the DRT, Allahabad, which has never been pressed by the