Smt Salma v. Indian Bank and 3 Ors.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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. 17/2022 Date: 24.02.2022
Smt. Salma Vs. Indian Bank
Present : Shri Rajeev Jaiswal, counsel for the appellant,
So far as the defect no. 2 is concerned, the learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant is neither borrower nor guarantor, he is a third party. Therefore, court fee as deposited by the appellant is sufficient.
I agree with the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, hence, there is no need to deposit more court fee.
Learned counsel for the appellant provides the pin code numbers of the parties and corrects the double page numbering. Learned counsel has also filed the legible copy of page no. 105. Hence, the defect nos. 2, 4, 6 & 7 are removed.
Learned counsel for the appellant seeks time to remove the remaining defects.
List this case on 23.03.2022 for removal of remaining defects.
Registrar
AK
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Smt. Salma
- respondent
Indian Bank
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · February
- CNR
- 091090000172022
- Bench
- LD Registrar
All orders in this case
9 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court