Manoj Kumar v. Canara Bank and 2 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
This order is a procedural direction noting the non-appearance of counsel for respondent no. 3, who cannot be represented by bank counsel due to conflict of interest, and issues a notice for them to engage fresh legal representation.
What did the court decide?
Notice issued to respondent no. 3 to engage another counsel.
What the court decided
Regular Appeal No. 50/2018 Date: 25.03.2022
Manoj Kumar Vs. Canara Bank & Ors.
Present: Shri V. K. Shukla, Advocate holding brief of Shri Anirudh Pandey, counsel for the appellant, Shri Maneesh Mehrotra, counsel for the respondents no. 1 & 2- Bank,
Perusal of the order dated 11.11.2021 shows that Shri Alok Rai, Advocate had submitted that as he was empanelled with the respondent-Bank, therefore, he will not represent the respondent no. 3-borrower. No reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 3 till date. The delay condonation application is also pending for consideration.
Let the notice be issued by the registry to the respondent no. 3- Borrower for engaging another counsel.
List this case on 20.07.2022 for reply.
Justice R. D. Khare
Chairperson
VN Giri
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Manoj Kumar
- respondent
Canara Bank
Coram
R. D. Khare
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
8 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court