Canara Bank v. Xenon Exports India Private Limited and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
Deputy Chairperson of the DRTA Kolkata directed the Appellant Bank to file an affidavit from a competent authority regarding action taken against officers responsible for the 226-day delay in filing the appeal, before listing the matter.
What the court decided
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
(Dy. No. 237 of 2019)
(Arising out of S.A. No. 169 of 2018 in DRT -II Hyderabad)
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
CHAIRPERSON
| 20.01.2023 | |
|---|---|
| The Authorised Officer, Canara Bank … Appellant |
|
| -Vs- | |
| M/s Bhadri Impex Private Ltd. & | |
| Anr. ….Respondents |
|
| Mr. Debasish Chakrabarty, Learned Counsel, Ms. Sarmistha |
|
| Pal, Learned Counsel for the | |
| Appellant | |
| Mr. N Srinivas, Learned | |
| Counsel, for the Respondent |
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
Heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellant on I.A. No. 521 of 2019. There is a delay of 226 days. It is submitted that grounds for condonation of delay are explained in Para 2 to 18 of the I.A.
All the grounds mentioned in the affidavit it prima facie shows that the delay was caused on the part of the lapse of some of the officers of the Bank. Let the Appellant should file an affidavit of a competent authority who is competent to take action against the concerned officer as to what action has been taken against the concerned officer in
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the delay of 226 days in filing the appeal can be condoned.
Whether an affidavit from a competent authority regarding action against defaulting bank officers is required before deciding the condonation of delay.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Canara Bank
- respondent
M/s Bhadri Impex Private Ltd.
Coram
Anil Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
11 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court