The bench allowed an interim application by the first respondent to set aside an ex-parte order, permitting it to contest the appeal on merits, and adjourned a related waiver issue.
Ex-parte order against the first respondent set aside to permit contesting the appeal on merits.
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. 477/2024 In Appeal on Diary No. 92/2020
Between
M/s Mission Industries through its Partner Mr Yogesh S/o Gajanan Bawankule
… Appellant/s
V/s.
Bank of Baroda & Ors
…Respondent/s
Mr Radhe Aggarwal, i/b M/s Radlaw Associates, Advocate for Appellant.
Mr S. N. Fuladi, Advocate for Respondent Bank.
-: Order dated: 16/07/2024:-
I.A. No. 477 of 2024 is an application by the first respondent for setting aside the ex-parte order passed against it on 22.09.2022, and to permit to contest the appeal on its merits. The reasons for not appearing have been explained.
The application has been opposed by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the appellant.
After hearing both sides, I find that there are reasonable grounds for setting aside the ex-parte order against the first respondent. Hence, the application is allowed and the ex-parte order passed against the first respondent is set aside.
Reply, if any, shall be filed on the application for waiver of predeposit.
For hearing on the waiver application, adjourned to 21.08.2024.
Sd/-
Chairperson
mks-03
1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the ex-parte order against the first respondent should be set aside to permit it to contest the appeal on merits.
M/s Mission Industries through its Partner Mr Yogesh S/o Gajanan Bawankule
Bank of Baroda & Ors
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
