The appellant failed to pay the third instalment of pre-deposit as directed by the Tribunal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed without engaging with the application for extension of time or restoration.
Appeal dismissed due to non-payment of the third instalment of pre-deposit.
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
Appeal on Diary No. 718/2023
Between
Bandu Pandurang Salunke … Appellant/s
V/s.
Tata Capital Financial Service Ltd. &Ors.
…Respondent/s
An Advocate for the Appellant is present.
Mr. Rajesh Nagori, i/b Mr. R.L. Motwani, Advocate for Respondents.
-: Order dated: 08/06/2023:-
The Appellant did not comply with the direction of this Tribunal to pay the 3rd instalment of pre-deposit. Hence, the Appeal stands dismissed.
The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Appellant submits that he is filing the application for an extension of time together with the application to restore the Appeal.
Application, if any, filed and found in order, shall be posted before the bench.
Sd/Chairperson
psa-10
1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal should be allowed despite non-compliance with the direction to pay the third instalment of pre-deposit?
Bandu Pandurang Salunke
Tata Capital Financial Service Ltd.
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
5 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
