Bank of India v. M/s Hariom Traders
Case brief
What is this about?
The Tribunal adjourned the appeal to allow the respondents time to file a reply, noting that the proceedings may continue until the next listing date.
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. 296/2023 Date: 08.05.2023
Present: Shri Alok Rai, counsel for the appellant, Shri V. K. Shukla, counsel for the respondent nos. 1 & 2, Shri Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, respondent no. 5-Auction Purchaser, in person, Shri Aatish Bansal, respondent no. 6- Auction Purchaser, in person,
Learned counsel for the respondent nos. 1 & 2 seeks time to file reply. Let the same be filed by the next date.
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that only a question of law is involved as to whether the DRT has power to condone the delay beyond the period prescribed in the Act. It is contended that there is no statutory provision for extension of time as per judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as the Hon’ble High Courts, therefore, in the interregnum, interest of the appellant may be protected.
In view of the above, the proceedings before the Tribunal below may go on, but final order may not be passed till the next date of listing.
List this case on 29.05.2023 for reply.
Anupam
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Appellant
- respondent
Respondent nos. 1 & 2
- respondent
Sanjay Kumar Agrawal
- respondent
Aatish Bansal
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · May
- CNR
- 091090002962023
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
10 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court