This single-judge order of the DRT at Mumbai dismissed an appeal because the appellants failed to comply with the direction to deposit the first instalment of the required pre-deposit.
Dismissal of the appeal and interlocutory applications 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
Appeal on Diary No. 2087/2023
Between
Rajendrasingh S/o Lashkarsingh Gahlen & Ors. … Appellant/s V/s.
The Authorized Officer, …Respondent/s
India Infoline Finance Ltd.
Mr. Rajendrasingh along with Mr. R.K. Thakkar, Advocate for Appellants.
Mr. Darhsil Desai, i/b Mrs. Uma Faida, Advocate for Respondent.
-: Order dated: 12/02/2024:-
The Appellants have not complied with the direction of this Tribunal to make the 1st instalment of pre-deposit.
Hence, the appeal stands dismissed.
Interlocutory Applications, if any, are dismissed as infructuous.
psa-12
Sd/Chairperson
1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the failure to make the pre-deposit justifies dismissal of the appeal?
Rajendrasingh S/o Lashkarsingh Gahlen & Ors.
The Authorized Officer
India Infoline Finance Ltd.
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
