The Tribunal dismissed an application for extension of time to deposit a pre-deposit of ₹2 crores required for an appeal, finding the plea lacked bona fides due to total non-payment and unverified illness claims.
Extension of time to deposit pre-deposit dismissed; appeal dismissed for non-compliance.
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.
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson
I.A. No. 603/2023 (EoT) In Appeal on Diary No. 1226/2023
Between
Mahesh S/o Undernomal Bhateja … Appellant/s V/s.
Bank of Baroda, through its Authorised Officer/ Chief Manager & Anr. …Respondent/s
Ms Sonali Jain, i/b Mr Rajesh K Thakkar, Advocate for Appellant. Ms Radhika J. Agrawal, i/b Mr S. N. Fuladi, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
Mr Meghnath Navlani, Advocate for Auction Purchaser.
deposit any amount towards the pre-deposit amount ordered by this Tribunal.
mks-12
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant was entitled to an extension of time for depositing the pre-deposit required to entertain the appeal.
Mahesh S/o Undernomal Bhateja
Bank of Baroda
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
