Bank of India and Anr. v. Nadeem Ahmad And 3 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
The court noted the filing of an appeal by Bank of India under the SARFAESI Act. It acknowledged counsel's submission regarding the timing relative to the receipt of the impugned order and procedural non-compliance by the tribunal. The matter was listed for final order.
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. 339/2023 Date: 23.05.2023
Bank of India Vs. Nadeem Ahmad
Shri Alok Rai, Ld. Counsel for the appellant is present. Defects reconciled except the filing of Delay Condonation Application.
Regarding Delay Condonation Application, Ld. Counsel for the appellant has submitted that there is no delay in the filing of the instant Appeal because the certified free copy of the impugned order dated 10.01.2023 was supplied to him on 14.03.2023 and Appeal is being filed on 20.03.2023 which is well under limitation. Moreover he has submitted that Rule 16 of the DRT Procedure Rules has not been complied by the DRT, Allahabad by communicating the final order to the appellant, hence, the application Under Section (5) of limitation is not required and prayed for placing the case before the Hon’ble Court for arguing on the matter.
A Caveat Application No. 12 of 2023 has been filed in the instant matter by Ld. Counsel V.K. Dubey. Copy of Appeal has been served upon the Caveator by the appellant. Proof of service has been filed.
The present appeal has been filed by Bank under section 18 of the SARFAESI Act against the final order dated 10.01.2023 passed by DRT, Allahabad in S.A. No. 625/2019.
List this case before Hon’ble Court on 30.05.2023 for order.
Registrar
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal is within limitation given the date of service of the certified copy of the impugned order.
Whether non-compliance by the Debt Recovery Tribunal violates Rule 16 of DRT Procedure Rules, rendering a limitation application unnecessary.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Bank of India
- respondent
Nadeem Ahmad
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · May
- CNR
- 091090003392023
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
9 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court