This order recorded that possession of the property was already taken by the bank despite an existing stay. Directions were issued to post the matter for further hearing after service of a copy of another application.
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. 68/2023 (Stay)
In
Appeal No. 09/2023
Between
Mahadev Hari Sarmalkar V/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. & Ors.
… Appellant/s …Respondent/s
An Advocate for the Appellant is present.
An Advocate for the Respondents is present.
-: Order dated: 21/06/2023:-
The matter is taken up for hearing by way of a Praecipe filed by the Appellant for seeking urgent relief.
The Appellant has filed another application seeking further relief and the Ld. Counsel appearing for the 1st Respondent Bank submits the copy has not been served. A copy shall be served and the reply filed.
There is already an order to direct a bank not to take possession without giving two weeks’ notice
Further steps should not be taken until the Appellant is served with two weeks’ notice
It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel appearing for Respondent Bank that the possession has already been taken. This submission is recorded.
Post on 28.06.2023 for hearing.
Sd/Chairperson
psa-37
1
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mahadev Hari Sarmalkar
ICICI Bank Ltd.
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
