This court dismissed a contempt appeal filed by the appellant against the Respondent Bank for taking possession of property in violation of a protection order, holding that the deposit after the stipulated time rendered the order effective.
The appeal and miscellaneous applications were dismissed as infructuous.
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.292/2024 (Contempt)
In
Appeal on Diary No. 854/2024 Between
Snehal Traders & Anr. … Appellant/s
V/s.
The Chitnavispura Sahakari Bank Ltd. …Respondent/s Mr. N.L. Karamchandani, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr. P. Khedikar, Advocate for Respondent appeared through a Video Conference.
-: Order dated: 15/05/2024:-
Reply has been filed on I.A. No. 292/2024 which is an application for contempt filed by the appellants contending that despite the protection order of this Tribunal, the respondent bank has taken possession of the subject property.
Hence, the appeal stands dismissed.
Misc. Applications, if any, are dismissed as infructuous.
rm-6
1
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent bank taking possession of subject property was in violation of the protection order and the appeal ought to be allowed.
Whether the subsequent deposit of the defaulted amount saves the situation from dismissal of the appeal.
Snehal Traders & Anr.
The Chitnavispura Sahakari Bank Ltd.
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
