In an interim order, the DTAT allowed condonation of a 5-day delay in filing an appeal challenging a status quo order, granted by the DRT, and listed the main appeal for reply.
Application for condonation of delay is allowed; matter listed for 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. 785/2024(CoD)
In
Appeal on Diary No. 342/2024
Between
State Bank of India
… Appellant/s
V/s.
Shobhabai Navinchandra Patni …Respondent/s
Mr. Harish Advant, Advocate for Appellant appeared through Video Conferencing.
Mr. Akshay Kulkarni, i/b Mr Amit Yadkikar, Advocate for Respondent Bank appeared. through Video Conferencing.
-: Order dated: 06/11/2024:-
The appeal is filed challenging the order dated 04.01.2024 in Securitization Application (S.A.) No. 138 of 2024 on the files of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad (DRT). The Tribunal had directed a status quo to be maintained by one-line order. There is a delay of 5 days in filing the appeal.
The Ld. Counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the delay has not been properly explained but considering the entire facts and circumstances of this case, I find that an opportunity has been granted to the appellant to contest the matter on merits, Hence, the application for condonation of delay is allowed.
The appeal be taken on file in case there are no other defects to be cured.
The respondent is at liberty to file the reply to the main appeal. List the matter before the Registrar on 21.11.2024.
Sd/Chairperson
mks-19
1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay of 5 days in filing the appeal warrants condonation.
State Bank of India
Shobhabai Navinchandra Patni
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
