Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2024) 07 DRAT CK 0011

Anand S. Jaisingh vs Central Bank of India & Ors

Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 15 July 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Menon, Chairperson
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
I.A. No. 465, 466 Of 2024 (CoD) In Appeal on Diary No. 1494 Of 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 359 words

Ashok Menon, Chairperson

1.

The matter is taken up for hearing by way of a praecipe filed by the appellant for seeking urgent relief.

This is an application for condoning the delay of 60 days in filing this appeal challenging the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Mumbai (D.R.T.) dated 12.04.2024 in Interim Application (I.A.) No. 2884/2022 in Appeal No. 05/2018. The appellant had approached the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay by filing a Writ Petition No. 5985/2024 within the stipulated for filing the appeal. There was also an interim relief granted against auction purchasers preventing the creation of third-party interest. Thereafter, the writ petition was disposed of on 04.07.2024, giving liberty to the appellant to approach this Tribunal within 7 days from the date of order of the Hon’ble High Court.

2.

The appellant filed this appeal, by the time, there was a delay of 60 days. The appellant seeks condonation of delay. The period spent by the appellant here before the Hon’ble High Court has to be condoned given section 14 of the Limitation Act. But there is also a delay for the earlier period which required to be condoned.

3.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, I find that no prejudice whatsoever would be caused to the respondents by condoning the delay in entertaining this appeal, and hence, the application for condonation of delay is allowed and the appeal be taken on filed if there are no others defects to be cured.

4.

It is pointed out that auction purchasers have already purchased the property and the Ld. Counsel appearing for the respondent bank submits that the possession is also handed over to the auction purchasers.

5.

The application for impleading the auction purchasers in this appeal is allowed and they are also represented by a Counsel.

6.

The respondent bank is directed to file a detailed reply by way of an affidavit, as to whether the possession is handed over to the auction purchasers or not. The auction purchasers who have already come on record, are directed not to create any third-party interest over the subject properties.

List on 30.07.2024 before the Registrar.