Uco Bank v. Yes Bank Limited
Case brief
What is this about?
In this single-fold adjournment order, the Tribunal did not decide any substantive legal issue or dispose of the appeal. Following the counsel's lack of instructions and incomplete Vakalatnama, the Bench directed the appellant to file Vakalatnama by the next hearing. The matter was postponed to 28.06.2022 for hearing.
What did the court decide?
Appellant directed to engage Advocate, file Vakalatnama by next date, and prepare for hearing; matter posted for 28.06.2022.
What the court decided
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT : MUMBAI Present : Mr. Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson
Appeal No. 186/2013
Between UCO Bank … Appellant/s V/s. Yes Bank Ltd. …Respondent/s
Mr. Umesh Shetty along with Ms. Rochyeta Shah, i/b M/s. Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh & Shroff & Co., Advocate for Respondent.
-: Order dated : 04/04/2022 :-
Ms. Sanjana Ghogare, learned counsel for Appellant submits that she has no instructions from the Bank and seeks permission to withdraw her Vakalatnama, therefore, she is not able to make any submissions.
Ms. Tejshree Choudhari, i/b M/s. Intralegal, submits that she proposes to represent Appellant in place of earlier Advocate and seeks time to file her Vakalatnama.
Appellant is directed to engage Advocate and file Vakalatnama on or before the next date and get ready for hearing on the next date.
Both sides shall get ready positively for hearing on the next date.
Post on 28.06.2022 for hearing.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
UCO Bank
- respondent
Yes Bank Ltd.
Coram
Ashok Menon
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
10 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court