The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Chennai declined the appeal filed by N.K. Mohta & Ors. against Edelwiess Asset Reconstruction Co Ltd. due to non-compliance of office objections within the stipulated time, pursuant to Rule 6(4) of the DRAT Procedure Rules 1994.
Appeal declined as office objections were not complied with in time.
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 DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI
A.IR:495/2023
N.K.Mohta & Anr V/S Edelwiess Asset Reconstruction Co Ltd & Anr
08/08/2023
Counsel Ms. Poornima for Appellant present.
Many of the office objections still not complied.
Accordingly, Appeal is declined in terms of Rule 6(4) of the DRAT Procedure Rules 1994, as office objections not complied in time.
Sd/Registrar
N.K. Mohta & Anr
Edelwiess Asset Reconstruction Co Ltd & Anr
As recorded by the court registry
7 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
