Dismissed

Punjab National Bank v. Ghanshyamdas Gems Jewels

DRT10 May 2024MA/68/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed an application seeking restoration of a Special Application (SA) defaulted on 18.10.2023. The Tribunal held the Applicant failed to prove valid grounds for restoration, citing a history of delays and absence. The Applicant's claim of appearing before another court on the same date was refuted due to lack of record evidence.

What did the court decide?

Application MA No.68/2023 is dismissed.

Punjab National Bank versus Ghanshyamdas Gems Jewels — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrS THE loth DAY OF, MAY | 2024 PRESENT: SRI. GUMMADI GOPICHAND HON'BLE PRESIDING OFFICER

¶2

MA. NO.68 0F 2023 IN sA. NO. 31 0F 2014

¶3

Between

¶4

Ghanshyamdas Gem & Jewels, C-1, Mayur Kushal Complex, Abids, Hyderabad-500001.

¶5

....Applicant/s

¶6

And

¶7

Punjab National Bank, 4-l-427, Bank Street, Koti, Hyderabad-500001.

¶8

... Respondent/s

¶9

DOCKET ORDER DT. 1O.O5.2024.

¶10

This is an application filed by the Petitioner under Order 9, Rule 4^{CPC rlw} Section 17 of SARFAESI Act r/w Section 19(25) of the RDB Act for setting aside the dismissal order dt.18.LO.2023 passed in SA 3ll2O14 and to^restore the SA to original file.

¶11

In the affidavit Iiled by the Managing Partner of the Petitioner, he averred that SA 37l2}l4 is filed challenging the notice u/s 13(a) of SARFAEI Act,^2OO2 issued by the Respondent Bank against the schedule property. In the said SA, the Respondent bank has entered appearance and already filed its detailed reply and documents and the SA was posted to 18.1O.2O23 for arguments. It is further averred that he filed O.S.No.745/2018 on the lile of I Senior Civil Judge, Hyderabad and the same was posted to 18.lO.2O23 as a last chance and as the counsel in the said case was not well, he requested the Petitioner to represent the case and to take a date in the said case. After representing in the said OS before I Senior Ci-vjl__Judee, Hyderabad, the Petitioner came to this Tribunalandbytrrattirypq:ml{'yuu.ai",.,issedfordefaultonaccountof S^{party in person in the SA. Non-}

¶12

a * 1 0 l,rAY 2tr]11 * qq! w-.

¶13

This application is resisted by the Respondent Bank by filing counter and it is contended that the Applicant/petitioner was continuously Iausing delay in disposal of the SA and the SA is being dragged over for several y.*r. it i" further submitted that sA 3 1lL4 *.s co-i.,g-io. arguments since 06.06.2023 and the Applicant had been requesting time and several times he had not represented before this Tribunal and so, the Tribunal was pleased to dismiss the SA on 18.1O.2O23 as there was no representation for the Applicant. As per the docket proceedings in OS No.74512O18, it is clear that it is the counsel for Respondent therein who sought time for adducing evidence and so, the matter was adjourned and so, the Petitioner approa"hed this Tribunal with unclean hands and accordingly, this petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶14

Heard both the Ld. Counsel and perused the material placed on record.

¶15

NolL), the point for consideration is uthether the Petitioner has established anA ualid ground for restoration of SA 31/ 14 which was d.ismissed. for d.efault oi 18.10.2023?

¶16

A perusal of the docket proceedings in SA makes it clear that the Managing Partner of the Petitioner/Applicant in SA 31/14 is appearing in person and even though he has taken several adjournments, never prepared to argue the case' As per the docket proceedings in the said SA, it is fuitfrer clear that on 29'O8.2O23 the Applicant was absent and there was no representation. So, the matter was adjourned to 14.09.2023 and on 14.09.2O2i also, the Applicant was called absent and there was no representation and subsequentiy, the matter was adjourned to 05. lo.2023 and on 05.10.2023 also, the Applicant was called absent and so the SA was posted to 09. lo.2023 for arguments. On o9'lo'2o23, the Applicant was present in person and submitted that appeal is pending before DRAT, Kolkata and the so, the SA was posted to 1g. lo.2o23 for arguments. on 18. 1o.2023, the Applicant called absent and there was no representation and so, the sA was dismissed for default.

¶17

After dismissal of the SA for default, the Applicant filed the present application contending that on 18.10.2023, he appeared before I Senior Civii Judge, Hyderabad for representing in O.S.No.7aV2OI8 as his counsel was unwell. In order to substantiate the same, he liled a copy of the docket proceedings dt'18'1O.2023 in O.S.No.745 12018 on the file of i'senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. But the said docket proceedings do not disclose that the Managing partner of the Applicant was pr"...r1 in person for making any representation in the said case. Moreove., a" per the saiA docket proceeair,g", it.ilj$#.S:fl for the Respondent therein i.e. Applicant herein in the o.S. :llin.1 ;f;f i# ffj.txi ^a+ttr

¶18

1 0^{ulY ?fI7l}

¶19

Hyderabad is not correct. Even though the SA is of the year 2oL4, the Applicant has not evinced any interest ior early disposal of the sA.

¶20

so, considering all the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the Applicant herein has lailed to establish any valid ground for restoration of the sA which was dismissed for default on 28.10.2023. So there are no merits in the MA and the MA is liable to be dismissed.

¶21

In the result, MA 68/ 2023 is d.ismlssed. I[o cosfs.

sd/ -

Presiding Officer

ffi

r{fiY 2t}2t :
S..ri
..,nsrl.tj;

¶26

IFUE 6OP LL^{s .1',^.-} -'^,"ra{n,"l*f-'A

¶27

DR7.I, HyDIi:i.!.a?

Punjab National Bank v. Ghanshyamdas Gems Jewels

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punjab National Bank v. Ghanshyamdas Gems Jewels

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Srinivasu Alamanda versus Andhra Pradesh Grameena Vikas Bank

State Bank of India versus M/S. Potay

State Bank of India versus Ayanar Polymers

State Bank of India versus M/S. D. Crafts Dental Lab

State Bank of India versus Mrs. Shyma Khan

Union Bank of India versus Sandeep Kumar Reddy