Rudra Bhattacharya and Anr. v. Bank of India
Case brief
What is this about?
Appellant challenged the inaction of the Debts Recovery Tribunal regarding pending applications and sought directions for day-to-day hearing. The Bench, noting the tribunal's compliance with healing the matter and the Presiding Officer's illness, disposed of the application without examining the merits.
What the court decided
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
MA Dy No 638 of 2022 (Arising out of TSA No. 05 of 2022 in DRT 1 Kolkata)
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
25.11.2022 Rudra Bhattacharya and anr … Appellant -vsBank of India & Anr … Respondent Appellant in person Mr. R. C. Prusti, Learned Counsel for the Respondent.
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Diary No. 638 of 2022
Application filed by the Appellant in person with a prayer for a direction to DRT-I, Kolkata for expeditious disposal, preferably on dayto-day basis, of I.A. No. 402 of 2022, I.A. No. 1360 of 2019 and I.A. No. 73 of 2019 along with S.A. No. 142 of 2015.
I have heard the Appellant, Mr. Rudra Bhattacharya in person and Sri R.C. Prusti, Learned Counsel for the Respondent Bank and perused the record. An order was passed by DRAT Kolkata on 29th August, 2022 wherein in Para 19 apart from other directions following orders were passed.
“Accordingly, all the record of S.A. No. 142 of 2015, including I.A. No. 1360 of 2019 and I.A. 402 of 2022, are hereby recalled from the file of DRT-3, Kolkata and transferred to DRT-1, Kolkata with direction that the I.A.s being I.A. No. 1360 of 2019 and I.A. No. 402 of 2022, should be disposed of, after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of this order and record. Learned Presiding Officer, DRT-1, Kolkata would be at liberty to fix dates on day to day basis; no adjournment should be granted to either party without any good reasonable cause.”
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Appellant is entitled to a direction for day-to-day hearing and expeditious disposal of pending applications.
Whether the Debts Recovery Tribunal has complied with the orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal regarding effective hearing.
Whether the matter should be disposed of on the merits or on grounds of delay and non-compliance prayers.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Rudra Bhattacharya
- respondent
Bank of India
Coram
Anil Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
5 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court