Manmeet Singh v. Bank of Baroda and Anr.
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. 620/2022 Date: 15.02.2023
Manmeet Singh Vs. Bank of Baroda & Another
Present: Shri Aman Kumar Srivastava, counsel for the appellant, None for the respondent-Bank,
Learned counsel for the appellant files rejoinder, which is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that in this case, pleadings are complete. He further states that it is admitted position that the Bank is in possession of the mortgaged property and the appellant is also in possession of that portion of the property, which is not mortgaged with the Bank, therefore, the Bank should not interfere with the same as in the said premises, the rice mill is in operation.
It is expected that the Bank will not interfere with the possession of the property of the appellant, which is not mortgaged till next date.
List this case on 18.04.2023 for reply.
Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson
Anupam
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Manmeet Singh
- respondent
Bank of Baroda
Coram
R. D. Khare
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · February
- CNR
- 091090006202022
- Bench
- Rajesh Dayal Khare
All orders in this case
10 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court