State of Uttar Pradesh v. I C I C I Bank Limited and 11 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
The single judge allowed the appellant's application for restoration of the appeal due to a sufficient non-intentional absence, restoring it to its original number.
What did the court decide?
Restoration of appeal to original number allowed.
What the court decided
M.A. No. 38/2021 In Appeal Dy. No. 102/2019 Date: 12.12.2022
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. & Ors.
Present: Shri K. S. Patel, counsel for the appellant, None for the respondent no. 10-Auction Purchaser,
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that since he was busy before another court, therefore, he could not reach in time before this Tribunal and the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. It is further submitted that the absence was not intentional and deliberate, hence the present application may be allowed and the appeal may be restored.
The reason shown in the application is sufficient, therefore, the restoration application is allowed and the appeal is directed to be restored to its original number.
List this case on 20.03.2023.
Anupam
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
Parties & counsel
- appellant
State of Uttar Pradesh
- respondent
ICICI Bank Ltd.
Coram
R. D. Khare
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · December
- CNR
- 091090001022019
- Bench
- Rajesh Dayal Khare
All orders in this case
7 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court