Allowed

Shri Mahjendra Shantilal Mutha v. Ahmednagar Merchant Co. Operative Bank

DRT21 Sept 2022CA/4/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The DHRT Aurangabad allowed a chamber appeal where the appellant's counsel claimed unwellness without submitting medical records. Relying on the counsel's statement, the Tribunal restored the diary numbers and directed the appellant to remove objections within one week.

What did the court decide?

Chamber Appeal No.4/2022 is allowed; Diary No.706/2022 is restored; Appellant directed to remove objections within one week.

Shri Mahjendra Shantilal Mutha versus Ahmednagar Merchant Co… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2022)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD (BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD) ORDER SHEET

¶2

	21.09. Sr. No	2022 .29 CA No.04/2022
Classifi cation	No. of Exh.
		CHAMEBER APPEAL No.04/2022 Shri. Mahjendra Shantilal Mutha ..Appellant Versus Ahmednagar Merchant Co-operative Bank ..Non-Appellant Mr. G. A. Rajput – Advocate for the Appellant None for the Non-Appellant. The matter is taken through Video Conference. 1. In this matter one Securitisation Application was moved by Diary No.706/2022. There were certain objections in the said Diary No.706/2022 which the counsel for the appellant has not removed and ultimately the Registrar has passed an order dated 28^thAugust, 2022 declining the registration of same. 2. The counsel for the appellant submits that he was not well during that period and he has placed certain medical record on the file.
		3. One thing is very clear the advocates are part and parcel of the Court. They are the Court Officers and any statement made by them at bar is believed to be true and if no medical records were placed and even then, if the counsel would have made a statement that he was not well and he was in personal difficulty, this Tribunal would have consider that request because it is believed that the officers of the court

¶3

[SBJ] (CA No.04/2022) Page 1 of 2

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD

¶5

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD)

¶6

ORDER SHEET

¶7

will not make any false statement at bar.
4. Believing the statement of the counsel for the appellant,
this Appeal is allowed.
5. In view of the above, I pass the following order through
video conference.
ORDER
A. Chamber Appeal No.4/2022 is allowed.
B. Diary No.706/2022 is restored.
C. The Appellant is directed to remove the objections within
one week. Thereafter the Securitisation Application shall
be listed before the Tribunal.
(Vimal Gupta)
Presiding Officer
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶8

[SBJ] (CA No.04/2022) Page 2 of 2

Shri Mahjendra Shantilal Mutha v. Ahmednagar Merchant Co. Operative Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Mahjendra Shantilal Mutha v. Ahmednagar Merchant Co. Operative Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Prakash Pandurang Ghule

Anil Kalyan Sonavane versus Au Small Finance Bank Limited

Bank of Maharashtra versus Babaji Hariji Karpe Patil Pratishthan

Patil Construction and Infrastructure Limited versus Stci Finance Limited

Punjab National Bank versus Vijay Bhagwan Pathare

Aakansha Inegration versus Union Bank of India