Bank of Baroda v. Manish Jaiswal
Case brief
What is this about?
The Tribunal dismissed the bank's appeal against an order directing it to restore possession to the respondent. The Court held that despite the lapse of a specific High Court interim stay, the timing of the bank's physical possession attempt (coinciding with a pending hearing on a stay application filed shortly thereafter) demonstrated ill intention, justifying the restoration order.
What did the court decide?
Appellant bank directed to restore possession within a week and comply with the DRT order dated 13.12.2022.
1
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Appeal Dy No. 697 of 2022
(Arising out of SA 730 of 2021 in DRT- 3 Kolkata)
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
11.01.2023
- Bank of Baroda, having its office at SSI Kasba Branch, 837, Rajdanga Main Road, 1st floor, Kolkata –
- The Authorized Officer, Bank of Baroda, having its office at SSI Kasba Branch, 837, Rajdanga Main Road, 1st floor, Kolkata – 700107
… Appellants -VsManish Jaiswal, residing at Flat No. 9B, 9th floor, Tower No.3, Diamond City West, 18, Ho Chi Min Sarani, PS. Thakurpukur, Kolkata – 700061.
… Respondent
Mr. Avisekh Guha, Learned Counsel with Ms. Ishita Ghosh, ld. Counsel for Appellants Mr. Arijit Bardhan, Learned Counsel with Ms. S. Bose, ld. Counsel for Respondent
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned DRT was justified in directing the appellant bank to restore possession despite an interim stay order from the High Court having lapsed.
Whether the appellant bank could claim lack of merit in the appeal due to procedural lapses in securing possession before the pending interlocutory application was heard.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Bank of Baroda
- respondent
Manish Jaiswal
Coram
Anil Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · January
- CNR
- 191090006972022
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
3 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court