Allowed

Ms Fashion Dot Com v. Punjab National Bank

DRT16 Sept 2022MA/145/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application to set aside the default dismissal of a miscellaneous appeal. The appellant's absence was excused due to outstation urgency and proxy unreachability, and the underlying appeal was restored for a merits hearing.

What did the court decide?

The miscellaneous application is allowed; the underlying miscellaneous appeal No. 56/2021 is restored and set for hearing.

Ms Fashion Dot Com versus Punjab National Bank — Civil Procedure and Limitation | DRT (2022)

¶1

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, PATNA Order with the Signature of the Court

¶2

Office action taken with data

¶3

Date of order or proceeding

¶4

MA 145 of 2022

¶5

	Mis Fashion Dot Com &others Vs Punjab National Bank Present Shri Shiv Pratap Ld. Counsel for the applicant Shri Arvind Kumar Ld. Counsel for the respondent.
16.09.2022	Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that MA 145/2022 has been filed to set aside the order dated 23.8.2022 passed in the SA 56/2021 on the ground of ld. counsel was not available due to some urgency he was out of the station and proxy counsel also could not appear before the Tribunal on the date fixed. Hence the SA was dismissed in default of the applicant. In view of above circumstances an opportunity for hearing on merit is may be granted to the applicant, accordingly, this MA is allowed. Let the SA 56/2021 is hereby restored. Put up the SA 56/2021 for hearing on 18.10.2022. Order be uploaded on the Tribunal's website. Patna (Kaushalendra Yadav) Presiding Officer

Mis Fashion Dot Com &others Vs Punjab National Bank
Present Shri Shiv Pratap Ld. Counsel for the applicant
Shri Arvind Kumar Ld. Counsel for the respondent.

16.09.2022

Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that MA 145/2022 has been filed to
set aside the order dated 23.8.2022 passed in the SA 56/2021 on the ground of ld.
counsel was not available due to some urgency he was out of the station and proxy
counsel also could not appear before the Tribunal on the date fixed. Hence the SA
was dismissed in default of the applicant.
In view of above circumstances
an opportunity for hearing on merit is may
be granted to the applicant, accordingly, this MA is allowed. Let the SA 56/2021
is hereby restored.
Put up the SA 56/2021 for hearing on 18.10.2022.
Order be uploaded
on the Tribunal's
website.
Patna
(Kaushalendra
Yadav)
Presiding
Officer

¶6

Ms Fashion Dot Com v. Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Fashion Dot Com v. Punjab National Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramakantkumar Ambalalbhai Jaiswal versus Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd.

State Bank of India versus Jai Bhole Makana Udyog

Uco Bank versus Dhrub Enterprises

Shri Jashbha Somabhai Chavda and Ors. versus Bank of Baroda

Icici Bank Limited versus Messers Vinod Kumar and Company

Vipul Ramniklal Vora versus Hdb Financial Services