An appeal was dismissed in default because the appellant did not appear to respond to the respondent bank's counsel; pending applications were closed and interim orders vacated.
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 DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Appeal No. 53 of 2022
(Arising out of S.A. 629 of 2014 in DRT-I, Hyderabad)
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
02.03.2023 Patibandla Harshini … Appellant -VsBank of Baroda (Earlier Vijaya Bank) & 3 Others … Respondents
Mr. Anirban Pramanik with Ms. Subhasree Dey, Learned Counsel for Respondent Bank
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL :
The matter is taken up in the revised list.
None appears to represent the Appellants while Learned Counsel for Respondent Bank are present.
Accordingly, the appeal, being Appeal No. 53 of 2022, stands dismissed in default.
Pending I.A.s, if any, also stand closed.
Interim orders, if any, stand vacated.
Copy of the order be supplied to Appellant and the Respondents and a copy be also forwarded to the concerned DRT.
File be consigned to Record room.
Order dictated, signed, dated and pronounced in open Court.
(Anil Kumar Srivastava,J) Chairperson
Dated: 2nd March, 2023 12/ac
Patibandla Harshini
Bank of Baroda
Anil Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
11 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
