The Delhi High Court order directs the Appellant to serve notices on Respondent Nos. 3 & 4, noting they are represented but have not filed a reply to the condonation application. Next procedural step is set for the service of notice.
Direction to serve notice on Respondent Nos. 3 & 4 by filing Affidavit of Service.
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.
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT : MUMBAI Present : Mr. Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson
Appeal No. 198/2016
Between
Mrs. Jaswanti G. Badiani … Appellant/s V/s. M/s. Pegasus Assets Reconstruction & Ors. …Respondent/s Mr. H. A. Noronha, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Sunil A. Humbre, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
-: Order dated : 01/04/2022 :-
Respondent Nos.3 & 4 are represented but no reply has been filed on the application for condonation of delay.
Appellant is directed to service notice on all the Respondents. Appellant shall file Affidavit of Service to this effect. Post on 28.06.2022 for service / hearing on M.A.
Sd/Chairperson
dpj/mks-6
1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an application for condonation of delay in filing reply needs to be decided before service of notice.
Mrs. Jaswanti G. Badiani
M/s. Pegasus Assets Reconstruction & Ors.
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
8 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
