The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal as the appellant failed to comply with office objections within the stipulated time under Rule 6(4) of the DRAT (Procedure) Rules 1994.
The appeal was declined.
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:482/2022
G.Saravanan V/S A.O.,Karur Vysya Bank Ltd
21/03/2023
Appellant counsel present.
None of the Office Objections are complied yet despite considerable time given.
Appeal declined in terms of Rule 6 (4) of the DRAT (Procedure) Rules 1994 as office objections are not complied in time.
Sd/Registrar
G. Saravanan
A.O., Karur Vysya Bank Ltd
As recorded by the court registry
12 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
