Allowed
Canara Bank v. Ms Kruti Stainless Steel Pvt. Ltd.
DRTCA/3/2022
What the court decided
AI extract
Outcome
Original Application (L) No. 541/21 restored back.
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.
| 13/02/2023 | Ex. No. |
Before Presiding Officer Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar, DRT-1, Mumbai. Roznama in Chamber Appeal 3 of 2022 State Bank of India Vs VHM Industries Ltd. |
Next date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Advocate for the appellant is present. Advocate for the respondent is present. |
|||
| Delay Condone. By way of present CA the applicant is seeking set aside the order dated 30/08/2022 passed by Ld. Registrar and to restore back Original Application (L No. 541/2021). Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits that due to Covid restrictions the matter could not be attended properly even otherwise there was change in the Advocate firm of the applicant, thus, the matter could not be attended and therefore he submits the present CA may be allowed and the original application may be restored back and the appellant may further be allowed to remove facts. |
|||
| Heard Ld. Counsel for the Appellant and also gone through the record. |
|||
| The record reveals that present OA was |
Chamber Appeal 3 of 2022
preferred in December, 2021, admittedly there
was the Covid restrictions during the said
period therefore in the interest of justice, the
present Chamber Appeal is hereby allowed
and the Original Application (L) No. 541/21 is
hereby restored back.
File be closed and confined to record room.
P.O.
DRT-I
Pnd/-4(S)
2
State Bank of India
VHM Industries Ltd.
Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court