State Bank of India v. Gaurav Pralhadbhai Pawar
Case brief
What is this about?
The Registrar of DRAT Mumbai, noting the appellant's absence and failure to comply with objections raised under Rule 6 of the DRAT Procedure Rules, presumed lack of interest and declined to register the Misc. Appeal.
What did the court decide?
The Misc. Appeal D. No. 137712024 is declined for registration.
What the court decided
^
Debts Recovery Appellale Tribunal. Mumbai
Misc. Appeal D. No. 137712024
State Bank Of lndia
... ... .Appell'ant
-Vs-
Gaurav Prahladbhai Pawar & Anr.
Respondents
Misc. Appeal D. No. 137712024is listedon today's board (22.07.2025) before the Ld. Registrar at11.30 AMfor compliance/removalof defects.The said Board is displayed in PublicNotice on the website of DRT/DRAT and also on the Notice Board of DRATMumbai.
None appeared for theAppellantwhen matter is called out.
This Misc. Appeal D. No. 137712024was filed on 25.06.2024and certain objections were raised by theRegistryfor compliance/removalof defects. However, despite sufficientopportunity, appellant failed to comply with/remove the defects till date.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a Misc. Appeal shall be registered when the appellant fails to comply with objections raised by the Registry without sufficient cause.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
State Bank Of India
- respondent
Gaurav Prahladbhai Pawar
- respondent
Anr
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- DRAT
- Decided on
- · July
- CNR
- 271090013772024
- Topic
- Banking and Recovery
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Neelesh Satish Kanade versus LIC Housing FInance Limited
Mr. Raghunath Satyanarayan Udata Partner of New Udta Textiles and Other versus Solapur Janata Sahakari Bank Limited
India Home Loan Ltd. versus Anjali Khushwaha and Ors.
Jayesh Krushnakant Parekh versus Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Limited