Allowed

Punjab National Bank v. Sri Kbs Automotive Pvt. Ltd. And Ors.

DRAT24 Nov 2022REGULAR APPEAL/1/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside an impugned order that dismissed an application for restoration of an originating application. The Tribunal found the lower court's order arbitrary and vague, lacking reasoned grounds, and restored the original file for expeditious disposal.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 15.11.2019 was set aside, and the O.A. No. 413 of 2013 was restored to its original file and number for expeditious disposal.

Punjab National Bank versus Sri Kbs Automotive Pvt. Ltd. And… — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶3

(Appeal No. 01 of 2020)

¶4

(Arising out of O.A. 413 of 2013 in DRT-1 Kolkata)

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON

23.11.2022

Punjab National Bank

-Vs-

KBS Automotives Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

Mr. D.N.Roy Chowdhury, ld. Counsel with Mr. S.K.Datta and Mr. R. Poddar, ld. Counsel for the appellant.

¶12

None

¶13

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶14

Instant appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 15.11.2019 passed in M.A. No. 33 of 2016 arising out of O.A. No. 413 of 2013.

¶15

It appears from record that O.A. No. 413 of 2013 was filed by the appellant bank on 09.10.2013 for realization of dues which was dismissed on 14.07.2016 on the ground that affidavit of service was not filed by the bank. It also appears that application for restoration of the O.A. by recalling the order dated 14.07.2016 was filed by the appellant bank on 12.08.2016 being M.A. No. 33 of 2016 which was dismissed by the impugned order wherein it was held that three years have passed since dismissal of the O.A., hence there is no merit in the M.A. Accordingly, restoration application was dismissed.

¶16

Feeling aggrieved, appellant has preferred instant appeal. Respondents are served by way of paper publication, but no one is present on behalf of them.

¶17

No doubt the O.A. was dismissed on 14.07.2016 on the ground that steps have not been taken by the appellant bank to serve upon the

¶18

¶19

respondents, defendants herein. It is not in dispute that application for restoration was filed within time. Learned DRT has dismissed the restoration application merely on the ground that three years have passed since dismissal of the O.A., as such, there is no merit in the M.A. It is a vague order. It is expected from learned Presiding Officer to pass a speaking and reasoned order. It is the discretion of the learned DRT to allow or dismiss application, but it is a settled proposition of law that order should be a speaking and reasoned one. Merely on the statement that three years have passed since dismissal of the O.A. could not be a ground for dismissal. Such type of exercise of power is arbitrary and could not be a legal one.

¶20

As far as ground for restoration is concerned learned counsel for the appellant submits that on the date fixed he could not be able to appear before the learned DRT due to traffic jam. The ground so taken is substantial for recalling the order. Impugned order passed by learned DRT is bad in law.

¶21

Appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 15.11.2019 is set aside. O.A. No. 413 of 2013 is restored to its original file and number. Learned DRT should proceed expeditiously to decide the O.A. in accordance with law. No order as to costs.

¶22

File be consigned to record room.

¶23

Copy of the order be supplied to the appellant and the respondents and a copy be also forwarded to the concerned DRT and be uploaded in the Tribunal’s website.

¶24

(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson

¶25

Dated: 24^th November, 2022 14/pkb

Punjab National Bank v. Sri Kbs Automotive Pvt. Ltd. And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Sri Kbs Automotive Pvt. Ltd. And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt N Deepa versus Union Bank of India

Indian Centre For Advancement Of Research Education Icare versus Punjab National Bank

Bank of Baroda and Ors. versus M/s Sunway Infrastructure Services Ltd. and Ors.

Ms Ma Tara Stores versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Ms Choice Precitech India Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

Nap Leathers Pvt. Ltd. versus Arcil