Canara Bank v. ramani
Case brief
What is this about?
The DRT condoned a 311-day delay in re-presenting an Originating Application filed by a bank for money recovery due to junior counsel's absence, relying on a High Court judgment. The application was allowed conditionally pending payment of costs and compliance filing.
What did the court decide?
Condonation of delay of 311 days in re-presenting the Originating Application.
What the court decided
1
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-III, CHENNAI
Dated this the 19th day of September 2025
SMT. S.V. GOWRAMMA Presiding Officer
M.A. No.257 of 2025 in OA Dy. No.4763/2023
M/s. Canara Bank Velacherry Branch, 2A, Dhandeeswaram Main Road, Velacherry, Chennai – 600042. Rep. by its Branch Manager. ...Applicant
-Vs-
M/s White Swan Laundary Rep. by its proprietor S. Ramani, W/o Gopi, No. 33, AGS Colony, II Street,
West Velacherry, Chennai – 42. ….Defendant
Counsels on record / appeared:
Counsel for Applicant : M/s. Jayandakumar
ORDER IN MA No. 257/2025
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether delay of 311 days in re-presenting an Originating Application for recovery of money is condonable.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
M/s Canara Bank Velacherry Branch
- respondent
M/s White Swan Laundary
Coram
S.V. Gowramma
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court