Gaurav Katyal v. Canara Bank and 10 Ors.
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. 296/2019 Date: 27.01.2023
Gaurav Katyal Vs. Canara Bank & Ors.
Present: Shri Ashok Pandey, counsel for the appellant, Shri Maneesh Mehrotra, counsel for the respondent-Bank,
As per report of the registry dated 25.01.2023, the respondent nos. 2 to 10 had been directed to be proceeded ex-parte vide earlier order dated 12.02.2021. The notice sent to the respondent no. 11 has returned back with endorsement “company has been closed”. No reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent-bank to the application for condonation of delay.
Learned counsel for the respondent-bank contends that pursuant to the earlier order dated 11.11.2022, he has received copy of the delay condonation application from the Registry fortnight back, therefore, he prays for some time to file reply. Let the same be filed by the next date, failing which appropriate order shall be passed.
List this case on 22.03.2023 for limitation.
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
Anupam
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Gaurav Katyal
- respondent
Canara Bank
Coram
R. D. Khare
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
9 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court