The tribunal directed the appellant to file a supplementary affidavit within two weeks as the application for substitution due to the death of an appellant was defective for lack of indication of the legal representatives' ages.
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.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
M.A. No. 04 of 2022
(Appeal Dy. No. 30 of 2019)
(Arising out of SA 310 of 2016 in DRT-2 Kolkata)
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
13.02.2023
Nitay Basu & Anr.
… Appellant
-VsUnited Commercial Bank & Ors. … Respondents Mr. D. Dutta, ld. Counsel for the appellant. None for the respondent.
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
An application for substitution being I.A. No. 66 of 2022 is filed for substituting the legal representatives of appellant no.1 who has since been died. It appears that age of legal representatives has not been indicated. Accordingly, application for substitution is defective in nature. Learned counsel for the appellant prays for and granted two weeks time to file supplementary affidavit.
List on 21.04.2023 for disposal of I.A. 66 of 2022.
(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson
Dated: 13 February, 2023 05/pkb
Nitay Basu & Anr.
United Commercial Bank & Ors.
Anil Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
10 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
