Allowed

Central Bank of India v. Mayukh Ranjan Sarbadhikary and Ors.

DRT27 Jan 2025MA/10/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

DRT-3 Kolkata allowed Central Bank of India's application to restore a transferred maintenance case hearing despite bank's significant delay in filing affidavit of service and unresolved service of process, noting disappointment in bank's conduct.

What did the court decide?

Local Case No. MA/73/2015 restored to original file; file placed before Registrar Bench on 06.02.2025 for completion of service and verification of evidence.

Central Bank of India versus Mayukh Ranjan Sarbadhikary and Ors. — DRT (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Debts Recovery Tribunal-3, Kolkata Order Sheet (Continuation)

¶2

CaseNo.MA/1 inIAL73	0/2024 3/2075 Central Bankof India Vs. [4avukh Ranian Sarbadhikari &Or	s.
Date of Order	Orderwithsignature	Offlceaction withdateand dated Signatureof partieswhen necessary
OrderNo.04 Dt.27.OL.2025 Sl.No.14	Present:- Forappellant:-Ld,Counsel Ms.D.^Mira Fordefendant:-None MA/70/2024istakenupforhearing.
	HeardLd.Counsel appearingfor^Applicant Bank.
	considered.
SH	Infillngthispetltionapplicantbank^praysfor recalfingthe orderdated 08.04,2024^passedby^this Tribunal. Itisstatedthaton08.04.2024therespondents filedtheirevidencesofaffidavit onlineand^also physicalcopywasfiledwith thedepartment.The matterwasfixedforverificationofdocuments^on 22.04.2024.
	Ld.Counselalongwiththe^Managerof^the applicantappearedforverificationof^documents, cametoknowthat thematter wasdismissed^on 08.04.2024.
	Itisstatedthattherewas^nodeliberate^delay andlachesonbehalf oftheapplicantfor^dismissalof this matteron08.04,2024.
	Applicantbank^praysforrestorationof^the

¶3

TA/7733/207s. Perused the case records it appears that 23.09.2020 was the last chance to complete service and file evidence vide order no. 10 dated 15.01.2020. The record was placed before this Tribunal on 08.04.2024 from the Registrar Bench vide order no.12 dated 20.02.2024 as applicant bank could not produce original documents for verification or failed to file any affidavit of service. Perused the case records it appears that the case is of the year 2015 bank could not even complete service till the date. Bank has failed and neglected to file affidavit of service for days together. Be that as it may the conduct of applicant bank is really disappointing, however, since it is a transferred case from DRT-2, the case has been transferred to this Tribunal subsequenfly I feel b inclind to restore the TAl1733/2015 as such. I Hence, the M lA is allowed. Let rA/7733/2015 be restored to its orig inal file and numberLet this file be placed before the Registrar Bench on 06.02.2025 for completion of service and verification of evidence. ( Kamal De ) Presiding Officer DRT-3, Kolkata

Central Bank of India v. Mayukh Ranjan Sarbadhikary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Central Bank of India v. Mayukh Ranjan Sarbadhikary and Ors.

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

Punjab National Bank versus M/S P L Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

State Bank of India versus Ms Sanghamitra Karmakar and Anr.

Punjab National Bank versus M/S Box Works and Ors.

Sri Ashok Kumar Agarwal and Anr. versus Bank of Baroda

Svt Enterprise and Ors. versus U Gro Capital Ltd. and Anr.

Bank of India versus Mrs Swapna Das and Anr.