Disposed

Orissa Minerals Development Company Ltd. v. Uco Bank and Ors.

DRAT22 Sept 2023REGULAR APPEAL/129/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal listed the appeal for hearing on 13.10.2023 while disposing of pending interim applications regarding the filing of affidavit in opposition pending deposit of costs and compliance with a conditional order.

What did the court decide?

Listed for hearing on 13.10.2023. I.A. 363 disposed. I.A. 362 allowed subject to deposit of Rs. 10,000 within seven days.

Orissa Minerals Development Company Ltd. versus Uco Bank and… — Banking and Recovery | DRAT (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

¶3

Appl. No. 129 of 2014

¶4

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, CHAIRPERSON

¶5

22.09.2023

¶6

Orissa Minerals Development Co. Ltd. … Appellant Vs.

¶7

UCO Bank & Ors.

¶8

….. Respondents

¶9

For Appellant : Mr. Swarup Banerjee, ld. Advocate Mr. Hari Charan Yadav, ld. Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. S. N. Patra Bhatta, ld. Advocate for resp.no.1 Mr. Joydeep Mukherjee, ld. Advocate. Mr. Kaunish Chakraborty, ld. Advocate. For resp.no.2.

¶10

THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :

¶11

I.A. 363 of 2023 is a put-up application. Since record is upup, I.A. 363 of 2023 is disposed of.

¶12

I.A. 362 of 2023 is an application for condoning the delay in filing affidavit in opposition. Vide order dated 17.08.2023 right to file opposition was allowed conditionally subject to payment of Rs. ten thousand as costs to be deposited within 10 days.

¶13

This is an appeal of 2014 wherein respondent bank has not yet filed opposition and sought time for one ground or the other. Specific order dated 17.08.2023 was passed that too has not been complied. Ground taken at Para 03 of the I.A. that Asset Management Branch of the respondent bank has been shifted recently from 5, LLR Sarani, Kolkata to 70A, Block-D, New Alipore, Kolkata, as such, numerous records could not be sorted out. However, costs of Rs. ten thousand was not deposited within time rather it was deposited on 14.09.2023. Learned counsel for the respondent bank submits that delay in filing affidavit in opposition is not intentional rather due to shifting of Asset Management Branch of the bank.

¶14

¶15

I have gone through the record and found that it was observed in the order dated 17.08.2023 that respondent bank was interested in delaying the proceeding, but time was extended for filing the affidavit in opposition. Now, affidavit in opposition is filed along with I.A. 362 of 2023 since the same is not filed within time.

¶16

I.A. 362 of 2023 is allowed subject to payment of Rs. ten thousand as costs to be deposited with the State Legal Services Authority within a period of seven days from today. It is made clear that if the costs is not deposited within time, affidavit in opposition will not be taken on record.

¶17

Appellant may file rejoinder within two weeks.

¶18

List on 13.10.2023 for hearing of appeal.

¶19

(Anil Kumar Srivastava, J) Chairperson

¶20

Dated : 22.09.2023 01 /pkb

¶21

Orissa Minerals Development Company Ltd. v. Uco Bank and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Orissa Minerals Development Company Ltd. v. Uco Bank and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bangla Bijuli Power Echnologies Pvt. Ltd. versus Idbi Bank Ltd. and Anr.

Ms Kesava Educational Society versus State Bank Of India

Abul Hasan Rafique Ahmed versus Housing and Urban Development Corporation

City Union Bank Limited versus Ms Tummidi Brothers Jewellery

M/s Shigan Export Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. versus Canara Bank

Hdfc Bank versus Debashis Gouranga Charan Acharya alias Debasish Acharya