Disposed

Axis Bank v. Ram Ekwal Prasad and Ors.

DRAT25 May 2023MISC APPEAL/14/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a miscellaneous appeal, the Court directed respondents, duly noticed by paper publication but absent, to appear and file reply by the next date, otherwise they would be deemed not to contest the matter. The matter was listed for future hearing.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to appear and file reply by next date, failing which it will be presumed they do not want to contest the matter.

Axis Bank versus Ram Ekwal Prasad and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | DRAT (2023)

¶1

Misc. Appeal No. 14/2022 Date: 25.05.2023

¶2

Present: Shri S. K. Gupta, counsel for the appellant-Bank, None for the respondents,

¶3

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, who has referred to the earlier order dated 24.01.2023 and it is argued that the respondents have duly been noticed by way of paper publication also and this court had directed the respondents to appear and file reply. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 21.04.2023, on which date this court has observed that inspite of opportunity being granted, neither anybody has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents nor any vakalatnama has been filed on their behalf. It is further contended that the respondents are contesting the S.A. No. 27/2016 before the Tribunal below, but they are deliberately not appearing before this Court. It is contended that there was a delay of 858 days in filing the restoration application, but without there being sufficient reason, the same was allowed by observing that lenient view is taken.

¶4

Learned counsel for the appellant also submits that in this regard, the Hon’ble Apex Court in para 16 of its judgment passed in F. Liansanga and Anr. Vs. Union of India and others, 2022(1) Apex Court Judgment (SC) 414 has observed that the court does not have any power to extend the time of limitation on equitable ground, even though the statutory provision may sometime cause hardship or inconvenience to a particular party.

¶5

The learned counsel for the appellant has further drawn attention of this court to the page no. 32 of the paper book and has stated that the free copy of the dismissal order was received by the respondent on 28.10.2019, which was also

¶6

appended in the writ petition no. 1172/2022, therefore, it cannot be said that the respondent did not have any notice of the said order or lenient view ought to have been taken. As such the order impugned is not sustainable.

¶7

As last opportunity, let the respondents, who have duly been noticed, put in appearance and file reply by the next date, failing which it would be presumed that they do not want to contest the matter.

¶8

List this case on 13.09.2023.

¶9

Justice R. D. Khare Chairperson

¶10

Anupam

Axis Bank v. Ram Ekwal Prasad and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Axis Bank v. Ram Ekwal Prasad and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Craftech Udyog Pvt. Ltd. and 4 Ors. versus Union Bank of India and Anr.

Arvind Kumar versus Central Bank of India and 3 Ors.

Mahanagar Nagrik Sahkari Bank versus M/S Lake City Communications and Anr.

Smt Vidya Maurya and 2 Ors. versus Bank of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

Union Bank of India versus M/ S Dolphin Softech Pvt. Ltd.

Union Bank of India versus M/S Dolphin Softech Pvt. Ltd.