Canara bank v. Shri G. Vijaya and Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
The DRAT allowed the Bank's appeal, setting aside the review dismissal. It directed the DRT to grant the Bank an opportunity to file documents regarding Rule 8(7) compliance of SARFAESI, subject to costs, and to decide the SARFAESI application afresh. Applicability: Banking and recovery, civil procedure.
What did the court decide?
Set aside the impugned review order, dismissed SARFAESI judgement, allowed review application, and ordered DRT to decide afresh after affording hearing opportunity.
Reportable/Non-Reportable
Appeal No. 116 of 2023-DRAT-Kolkata
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
CHAIRPERSON
Diary No. 588 of 2021
(Arising out of S.A. 96 of 2018 in R.A. 20 of 2019 in DRT-I, Hyderabad)
Canara Bank, represented by its Authorised Officer, ARM Branch, Hyderabad, 3rd Floor, Circle Office Building, MCH No. 10-3-163 & 10-3163/A, Beside Ril Nilayam, Secunderabad – 500 026.
… Appellant
-Versus-
- Gurram Ramesh Reddy, since deceased represented by :
- 1A. G. Vijaya, residing at G-119, 1st Floor, Madhura Nagar, G-Block, Hyderabad – 500 038;
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a mistake in not filing documents due to transfer of accounts can constitute a mistake apparent on the face of the record under Section 114 CrPC equivalent grounds allowing a review.
Whether the Debts Recovery Tribunal lacks powers to revise its erroneous order dated 14.9.2021 dismissing the review application.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Canara Bank
- respondent
Gurram Ramesh Reddy
- respondent
Smt. K. Charulatha
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · May
- CNR
- 191090005882021
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
All orders in this case
10 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court