The Delhi HC relied on this order to allow without predeposit.tribunal held that being aware of proceedings for the mandatory predeposit sections 21 of the RDB Act appeal allowed without mandatory predeposit
The appeal is allowed and there shall be no pre-deposit required in the Appeal.
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
M.A. No. 670/2015 (WoD) In Appeal No. 264/2015
Smt. Mamatha R. … Appellant/s V/s. Punjab National Bank & Ors. …Respondent/s
Mr Puneet Gogad, Advocate for Appellant. Ms Asha Bhuta, i/b M/s Bhuta & Associates, Advocate for Respondent No. 1.
-: Order dated: 18/01/2023:-
The Respondent has filed a reply only today, though, there was a specific direction to file a reply within three weeks. The reply is received.
It is admitted fact that the Appellant is a third party. The averment in the reply is that the Appellant was throughout aware of the proceedings in the O.A. But that itself will not be sufficient to direct the Appellant to pay the mandatory pre-deposit required to be paid under Sec.21 of the RDB Act.
Hence, M.A. No. 670 of 2015 is allowed and there shall be no pre-deposit in the Appeal.
Sd/Chairperson
mks-4
1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a third party who was aware of the proceedings is directed to pay pre-deposit under Sec.21 of the RDB Act in an appeal
Whether failure to file reply within time directed by the Tribunal affecting the decision on pre-deposit requirement
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Mamatha R.
Punjab National Bank
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
8 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
