L Elango Son of Lingasamy v. City Union Bank Limited
Case brief
What is this about?
The appeal was declined because office objections remained pending despite clarification provided by the appellant's counsel, failing compliance with Rule 6(4) of the DRAT Procedure Rules, 1994.
What did the court decide?
The appeal was declined in terms of Rule 6(4) of the DRAT Procedure Rules, 1994.
What the court decided
IN THE DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI
A.IR:723/2023
L.Elango V/S City Union Bank Ltd & Ors
04/08/2023
Representing counsel V.P. Parivallal for Appellant present.
Office objections in this matter still remains pending, despite clarification provided by Appellant counsel.
The Appeal is declined in terms of Rule 6 (4) of the DRAT Procedure Rules, 1994, as pending objections are not complied in reasonable time.
Sd/Registrar
Parties & counsel
- appellant
L.Elango
- respondent
City Union Bank Ltd & Ors
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
3 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court