Disposed
Narcinva Damodar Naik v. Canara Bank
DRTMA/4/2022
What the court decided
AI extract
Outcome
Disposed
A compact analysis
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.
¶1
| 18/08/2022 | Ex. No. |
Before Presiding Officer Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar, DRT-1, Mumbai. Roznama in MA 4 of 2022 Narcinva Damodar Naik Vs Canara Bank |
Next date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Advocate Mr. Rishab Chopra i/b Vidhii Partners appeared for the applicant. Advocate Mr. A. Shaikh i/b Rajkumar Shukla appeared for the respondent. By way of this MA the applicant has prayed to condone the delay in filing the present SA. Ld. Counsel for the applicant press the present MA. Ld. Counsel for the respondent bank objected on the present MA. Looking to the facts mentioned in the MA and as mentioned in the MA that Hon’ble Apex Court in the Suo Motto PIL No. 3/2020 has already directed/observed to condone the delay, therefore, the present MA is hereby allowed and delay in filing the SA is hereby condoned. The registry is hereby directed to register the SA after verifying its defects. MA File be closed and consigned to record room. Sd/- P.O. DRT-I |
¶2
Pnd/-30
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- applicant
Narcinva Damodar Naik
- respondent
Canara Bank
Coram
AI extract
Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court