Jagannath Sarangapani vs State Bank Of India And Ors.

Ranjit Singh, J

This appeal is filed with delay of 14 days. An application (IA No. 542/2015) has been filed praying for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. Notice in the appeal as well as application was issued. Counsel for the Bank states that the appeal is filed with delay only to delay the recovery in this case. As per the Counsel, there are no sufficient reasons for condoning this delay. Delay of 14 days in filing the appeal has been well and sufficiently explained. Delay is hardly of a duration which would ultimately have effect on the recovery in this case. Accordingly, I am inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal. The application is accordingly allowed. Delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

With the concurrence of the Counsel for the parties, the appeal is taken up today for-hearing.

Since the prayer in the present appeal is regarding denial of opportunity to address arguments in this case which apparently has not been afforded to the appellant and other respondents in well and proper manner, the prayer for waiver of the requirement of pre-deposit appears to be justified. Accordingly, the present appeal is heard without requiring the appellant to make any pre-deposit.

Otherwise, heard Counsel for the parties. Conceded position is that the Tribunal below had fixed the case for hearing on 24th February, 2015. On that day, request was made on behalf of the Counsel for the appellant for adjournment as she was unwell. The Tribunal below instead of granting adjournment reserved the case for orders with a direction to the parties to come and argue the matter within five days. The manner, in which the case was reserved for orders without hearing Counsel for the parties, apparently would show parties were not afforded opportunity of hearing. It would be rather difficult for the Counsel to come and argue the case once it is not shown or reflected in the cause list. How and in what manner the Counsel for the parties would liaison with each other to present at the same time to argue the case is not made out. The parties were thus not afforded fair opportunity to present their respective case in a proper manner.

Accordingly, the prayer made in the appeal is allowed. The case is remitted back to the Tribunal below to afford opportunity of hearing to the appellant as well as other respondents, who are interested in advancing their submissions. The Tribunal below, after hearing the parties, may pass any fresh order in accordance with law. The present appeal is accordingly disposed of in the above terms. Parties through their Counsel are directed to appear before the Tribunal below on 30th March, 2016.