Ckc Star Leathers Private Limited v. Canara Bank And 2 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
Rejection of urgency application by respondent/Auction Purchaser seeking preponing of hearing due to inability to handover perishable movable assets and assertion that items were not secured assets as applicant was not borrower or guarantor. Case listed for hearing.
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. 275/2022 Date: 18.05.2023
Present: Shri Sandeep Arora, counsel for the appellant, Shri Maneesh Mehrotra, counsel for the respondent no. 1- Bank, Shri V. K. Shukla, counsel for the respondent no. 2, Shri S. K. Gupta, counsel for the applicant/respondentAuction Purchaser.
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant on the urgency application being I.A. No. 379/2023, which has been filed by the respondent no. 3-Auction Purchaser for preponing the matter from 14.07.2023 on the ground that the movable assets, which were purchased by the said respondent, could not be handed over to the auction purchaser as the said items were perishable, which were substantial depreciated, therefore, the auction purchaser is not interested in purchasing the same. Since the possession thereof could not be handed over to him, therefore, his contract to supply the same to Uganda also failed. The record shows that the objection was taken by the respondent no. 2 in the S.A. that the movable goods, which have been sold by the respondentBank are not the secured asset, as the applicant is neither borrower nor guarantor, but he is a third party, therefore, the said goods could not have been auctioned.
After hearing the learned counsel for the applicant, it appears that there is no good ground made out in the urgency application for preponing the matter, therefore, the urgency application is rejected.
List this case on the date already fixed i.e. 14.07.2023.
Justice R. D. Khare
Chairperson
Anupam
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Appellant
- respondent
Bank
- respondent
Respondent no. 2
- applicant
Auction Purchaser
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · May
- CNR
- 091090002752022
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
17 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court