Partly allowed

M/s Kissan Cold Storage v. City Union Bank Limited

DRAT16 Sept 2022REGULAR APPEAL/103/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal allowed an application for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. It ordered the appellant to deposit 35% of the claim amount as predeposit, staying the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

Application for condonation of delay allowed; direction to deposit 35% of claim as predeposit; stay on impugned order granted.

M/s Kissan Cold Storage versus City Union Bank Limited — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2022)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶2

(Appeal Dy. No. 189 of 2022)

¶3

(Arising out of O.A. 331 of 2019 in DRT-2 Hyderabad)

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON

¶5

16.09.2022

¶6

M/s. Kissan Cold Storage

… Appellant

-Vs-

City Union Bank Ltd.

… Respondents Ms. Aprajita Rao, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. R. Maity, ld. Counsel with Mr.K. Deb, ld. counsel for the respondent.

¶11

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶12

I.A. No. 97 of 2022 is filed by the appellant u/s 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay. Appeal is preferred against the impugned order dated 02.11.2021. Appellant has filed a writ petition being No. WP 15310 of 2022 before Hon’ble High Court of Telengana which was decided on 22.04.2022 and disposed of on the ground of alternative remedy giving liberty to file appeal before DRAT. Appeal was filed on 27.05.2022. Learned counsel has placed reliance on the Hon’ble Apex Court judgement in Suo Motu Writ Petition No. 03 of 2020 dated 10.01.2022 wherein exemption of period of 90 days from 01.03.2022 was granted.

¶13

Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the I.A. submitting that there is no sufficient ground for condonation of delay.

¶14

Having gone through the records and facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court, I.A. No. 97 of 2022 is allowed. Delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. I.A. is thus disposed of. Register the appeal by providing regular appeal.

¶15

Appellant has also filed I.A. 98 of 2022 seeking waiver from predeposit. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is liable to pay the amount if warehouse receipt which was submitted by the original borrower is not taken into consideration. Learned counsel for the

¶16

respondent opposes the submission made by the appellant by submitting that DRT has made a categorical finding about the liability of the appellant.

¶17

It is apparent that learned DRT has recorded its finding regarding liability of the appellant to pay the amount. Having gone through the records and after hearing submissions made by the parties as far as waiver is concerned and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case the appellant should deposit 35 per cent of the claim amount within a period of two weeks.

¶18

List on 29.11.2022 for further order.

¶19

Respondent shall file opposition within three weeks with advance copy to the appellant who may file rejoinder within two weeks thereafter.

¶20

In the meantime, operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed.

¶21

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶22

Dated: 16^th September, 2022 03/pkb

M/s Kissan Cold Storage v. City Union Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Kissan Cold Storage v. City Union Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sri Dipankar Majumder and Others versus State Bank of India

Yerram Venkata Ramana versus Karur Vysya Bank

Ms Mansarowar Ispat India Pvt. Ltd. versus Canara Bank and Ors.

Soumya Ranjan Swain versus Bank of Baroda

Punjab National Bank Oriental Bank of Commerce versus Avijit Mukherjee

Manoj Kumar Jayaswal versus Idbi Bank