Appeal against an urgency application filed by an auction purchaser alleging violation of a status quo order and forcible possession by the appellants. The bench listed the matter for a future date.
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.
Appeal Dy. No. 401/2019 Date: 20.10.2022
Shri Anirudh Prasad Singh & Anr. Vs. Central Bank of India & Ors.
Present: Shri Alok Rai, counsel for the appellants, Shri Himanshu Tiwari, counsel for the respondent-Bank, Shri Anay Kumar Srivastava, counsel for the respondent no. 4-Auction Purchaser,
Heard the learned counsels for the parties on the urgency application being I.A. No. 497/2022 filed by the respondent no. 4.
Learned counsel for the applicant-respondent No. 4 submits that inspite of status quo order dated 28.02.2020 passed by this Tribunal, the appellant is taking benefit of the interim order with ulterior motive and has brought down the structure of premises and has taken forcible possession of the part of secured assets and has also raised illegal construction thereupon thereby making it impossible for the applicant/respondent no. 4 to carry out the business, therefore, the urgency application has been filed by the applicant/respondent no. 4.
The report of the registrar dated 18.10.2022 shows that the matter is already fixed for 31.10.2022.
In view of the above, the urgency application is disposed off.
List this case on the date already fixed i.e. 31.10.2022.
Chairperson
VN Giri
Anirudh Prasad Singh & Anr.
Central Bank of India
VN Giri
As recorded by the court registry
11 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
