Canara Bank (Syndicate Bank) v. Prakash Shetty
DRTOA/448/2022
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
| OA/448/2022 IN IA Diary |
OA/448/2022 Counsel for the Applicant is present and has filed an IA for Attachment Before Judgement against the properties of Defendants No.1 to 3. The Defendant has already set as ex parte. The Applicant Bank has already adduced the evidence and got marked the exhibits as A3 to A18, as per POA. The IA was allowed in the open court directing the Registry to issue notice on IA to the Defendants and list the matter before the registrar Court on 12.04.2024. However, on perusal, it is noticed that the IA filed for Attachment Before Judgement by the Applicant is without the IA Number and hence the records are sent to the Registry for numbering the IA. On scrutiny of the IA by the Registry, it is observed that the documents furnished along with the IA are in the name of the father of Defendants No.1 to 3 and not in the name of any Defendants in the case and also not produced any up to dated Encumbrance Certificate before this Tribunal to establish the properties are in the name of Defendants No.1 to 3. Counsel for the Applicant is directed to comply the office objections. |
|---|
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- applicant
Applicant Bank
- respondent
Defendant No. 1
- respondent
Defendant No. 2
- respondent
Defendant No. 3
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
2 orders share this CNR
- Order 1 — this page · P.o
- Order 2 · P.o
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court