Bank of Baroda v. Mukesh Jaiswal and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court adjourned an appeal filed by Bank of Baroda due to the unavailability of the appellant's arguing counsel, listing it with another appeal for a future date.
What did the court decide?
Adjournment granted; matter listed for 09.04.2024.
What the court decided
Appeal Dy. No. 268/2023 Date: 19.12.2023
Bank of Baroda Vs. Mukesh Jaiswal & Ors.
Present: Shri S. K. Gupta, Advocate holding brief of Shri Avinash Jaiswal, counsel for the appellant, Shri Ayur Jain, counsel for the respondent-Auction Purchaser,
A mention has been made on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellant that the arguing counsel Shri Avinash Jaiswal is indisposed, therefore, he is unable to appear before this Tribunal today, hence he prays for adjournment on his behalf.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Auction Purchaser submits that the matter is being repeatedly adjourned at the behest of the learned counsel for the appellant.
As prayed, list this case along with appeal Dy. No. 13/2023 on 09.04.2024.
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
Anupam
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Bank of Baroda
- respondent
Mukesh Jaiswal & Ors.
- respondent
Auction Purchaser
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · December
- CNR
- 091090002682023
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
8 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court