Arun Kumar Kar v. Uco Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
This order by the Debts Recovery Appeal Tribunal in Kolkata granted an adjournment to September 6, 2023, for a personal reason. It also passed a show cause notice against the respondent bank's authorized officer for non-compliance with prior orders to file an affidavit.
What did the court decide?
Adjournment granted to 06.09.2023; show cause notice issued to authorized officer.
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.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA Appl. Dy. No. 367 of 2022 THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON
17.08.2023
Arun Kumar Kar & Anr.
… Appellants Vs.
Respondents
- For Appellant : Mr. Siddartha Banerjee, ld. Counsel. Ms. Arpita Saha, ld. Counsel.
- Ms. Ankita Ghosh, ld. Counsel. Mr. Anjan Bhandari, ld. Counsel.
For Respondent : Mr. Santosh Kr. Roy, ld. Counsel Mr. S. Agarwal, ld. Counsel.
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
At the very outset learned counsel for the respondents sought adjournment on his personal ground.
As far as adjournment is concerned since it is sought on personal ground matter is adjourned to 06.09.2023. But at the same time it is hereby observed that despite specific orders passed on 04.07.2023 and 12.07.2023 concerned authorized officer has not filed affidavit. Such conduct shows the defiant attitude of the concerned authorized officer. It may also be brought on record that General Manager of the respondent bank was summoned to appear before the Tribunal on 12.07.2023, who appeared on that date and thereafter his attendance was exempted. Even then the concerned authorized officer did not understand the gravity of the matter and has not filed affidavit as required. In such circumstances show cause notice be issued to the concerned authorized officer to reply by 06.09.2023 as to why the matter shall not be referred to the disciplinary authority of the respondent bank for initiating disciplinary proceeding for disobeying the order of the Tribunal. Let a copy of this order be sent to the General Manager of the respondent bank for information and necessary action. Registry is directed to comply with the order forthwith.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Arun Kumar Kar & Anr.
- respondent
Respondent Bank
Coram
Anil Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
21 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court