Ranajit Saha v. Tripura Gramin Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
This single-paragraph order records the admission of a regular appeal filed by the appellant in the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal against a bank for a violation of the SARFAESI Act. The tribunal notes the filing details, observes the absence of a delay petition, but schedules the matter for admission.
What the court decided
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
Regular Appeal Dy. No. 342 of 2023, Date 26/06/2023
Sri RanajitSaha&Ors.-------- Appellant
Versus
Tripura Gramin Bank &Ors.------- Respondent
Ld. Advocate Mr. Jayabrata Basu Ray appears on behalf of Appellant.
None appears for the Respondents
Ld. Advocate Mr. Jayabrata Basu Ray files three numbers of supplementary affidavits to (i) the appeal, (ii) to waiver of court fee application under rule 13 of the security interest (enforcement) rules, 2002 and (iii) to the stay petition. Ld. Advocate also files a list of dates and events in respect of stay petition.
Affidavit of service is filed in respect of service of (i) application of waiver of court fee, (ii) appeal &(iii) stay petition and also supplementary affidavits in connection with(i) appeal, (ii) waiver of court fee application and (iii) stay petition upon all the three respondents. Postal tracking reports and courier reports are showing that services upon all the respondents are confirmed.
Received a Regular Appeal Dy. No. 342 of 2023 through online on 24/05/2023 under section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 presented by Ld. Advocate Mr. Jayabrata Basu Ray on behalf of Sri Ranajit Saha&Ors., and hard copy of the same was received on 26/05/2023. On scrutiny it was found that Impugned order was passedon 21/04/2023, certified copy was applied as well as received on 26/04/2023 and appeal was filed online on 24/05/2023 but delay petition was not submitted.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the regular appeal under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 was filed within the statutory period of limitation given the date of receipt of the impugned order.
Whether the appeal is properly admitted for hearing in light of the lack of a formal delay petition at the filing stage.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Ranajit Saha & Ors.
- respondent
Tripura Gramin Bank & Ors.
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
8 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court