This application sought refund of the auction bid amount by an intervener. The DT stayed all further proceedings on the matter, precluding the allowed application. The intervener is directed to apply for impleadment in the appeal. Matter listed for camp court at Hyderabad.
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.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
(Appeal No. 17 of 2019)
(Arising out of O.A. 67 of 2018 in DRT, Cuttack)
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
08.09.2022 Andhra Bank
… Appellant
-vs-
M/s. Shrusti Infotech & Others … Respondent
Mr. Prabir Banerjee, Learned Counsel for Appellant Bank
Mr. Prabir Banerjee, Learned Counsel for Respondent/ M/s. Shrusti Infotech
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
I.A. 85 of 2022
This application is for refund of the bid amount by the Intervenor, who is an auction purchaser.
It appears that the application is moved in compliance of the order passed by the Learned DRT in S.A. 59 of 2017 which is under challenge in this appeal. There is an interim order dated 18th November, 2020 wherein all further proceedings, pursuant to the order passed by the Learned DRT, were stayed.
Accordingly, the application, being I.A. 85 of 2022, could not be allowed and is dismissed.
Appellant, if so advised, may move appropriate application for his impleadment as party in this appeal.
In view of the order dated 19th April, 2022, let the matter be listed in the Camp Court, as and when held at Hyderabad.
(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson
Dated: 8th September, 2022 01/ac
Andhra Bank
M/s. Shrusti Infotech
Anil Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
9 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
