The Appeals Tribunal allowed the Infant of Amending the Reply to the I.A. No. 648/2022 and set the ex-parte order against the respondent bank. The bank is granted two weeks to file a reply to the main appeal.
I.A. No. 648/2022 (setting aside of ex-parte order) is allowed; respondent granted two weeks to file reply.
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
I.A. No. 648/2022
In
Appeal No.82/2022
Between
Girish Vinayakrao Joshi … Appellant/s V/s.
Union Bank of India & Ors.
…Respondent/s
Mr Puneet Gogad, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr Charles D’Souza along with Ms N. I. Bakali, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
-: Order dated: 03/02/2023:-
The application for receiving the reply to I.A. No. 648/2022 out of time is allowed since it is not opposed by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent Bank.
1
Post on 24.02.2023 for hearing.
Status-quo with regard to the subject property shall also be maintained.
Sd/Chairperson
rm-12
2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the ex-parte order setting aside the respondent bank as a party due to non-appearance should be set aside given the unavailability of caveat notice.
Whether the application for time extension to file reply in I.A. No. 648/2022 should be allowed.
Girish Vinayakrao Joshi
Union Bank of India
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
6 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
