Mukesh Rajak v. Aditya Birla Housing Finance Limited
Case brief
What is this about?
Appeal dismissed in default. The appellant was absent, acknowledging the appeal was filed to delay proceedings. Multiple adjournments were granted before this final admission hearing where no representation appeared.
What did the court decide?
Discarded appeal and disposed of any pending interim orders in default of appellant.
What the court decided
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA CHAIRPERSON
Misc. Appeal Dy. No. 872 of 2024
(Arising out of SA No. 523 of 2024 in DRT-3, Kolkata)
Order No. 06 13.12.2024
Mukesh Rajak …….Appellants -Vs-
Aditya Birla Housing Finance Ltd. & Ors ……Respondents
None for the Appellant.
Mr. Avishek Guha, Learned Counsel Mr. Kaustav De Sarkar, Learned Counsel for the Respondent
THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Admission
The matter is taken up in the revised list. None is present for the Appellants. Mr. Abhishek Guha, Learned Counsel has put an appearance for the Respondents. It appears that this Appeal is filed just to delay the proceedings as on 8th October, 2024 on the request of Learned Counsel for the Appellant, the matter was adjourned for 18th November 2024. On 18th November, 2024 the matter was adjourned for hearing on admission on 10th December, 2024. On 10th December, 2024 on the request of Learned Counsel for the Appellant, the matter was again adjourned to 11th December, 2024. Again, adjournment was sought and matter was directed to be listed for today with a specific direction that no further adjournment shall be
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Mukesh Rajak
- respondent
Aditya Birla Housing Finance Ltd.
Coram
Anil Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · December
- CNR
- 191090008722024
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court