Drat Allahabad Court December 2005 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Central Bank of India Vs. Sharad Rice Industries
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-2005
Reported in: I(2006)BC182
1. All these appeals have been heard analogous and are being disposed of conjointly by this judgment. The appellant in all the cases is Central Bank of India, although respondents are different, but points in issue with regard to all the cases are the same and similar as have been submitted at the very outset by the learned Counsel of both the parties.Without giving much details about factual aspect of the cases, it must be mentioned that the impugned orders in these appeals have been passed on the basis of a petition filed by the respondent-defendants under Section 22 of the DRT Act read with Rule 18 of the DRT Procedure Rules and on the basis of principle of natural justice. The taking of loans by the respondents on factual aspects had not been denied and as such without filing of reply to the original application filed in the cases, petitions were filed as mentioned above for settlement of the claims on the basis of RBI Guidelines. The appeal has arisen out of the final order dated...
Ally'S Packaging And Ors. Vs. State Bank Of India
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2005
Reported in: I(2006)BC180
1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 2.12.2004 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Allahabad, in M.A. No.14/04, whereby and whereunder the application filed by the appellants on 15.3.2004 referring the order passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court on 5.5.2003 in Writ Petition No. 19263/03 has been dismissed.2. There seems to be a chequered history of the case. The respondent-State Bank of India filed the original application before the DRT, Allahabad for recovery of Rs. 20,64,039.44 against the appellants and the same was registered as O.A. No. 90/01. For absence of the appellant-defendants, the original application No. 90/01 was decided ex pane by the Tribunal against the defendant Nos. 1 to 7 on 22.3.2002. On 9.9.2002, the appellants preferred a restoration petition under Section 22(2)(g) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter shall be referred to as the Act) for setting aside the ...
Canara Bank Vs. Tribeni Motors and ors.
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2005
Reported in: 3(2006)BC120
1. This appeal has been preferred by the above named appellant-Bank against the dismissal order recorded by the then Presiding Officer, D.R.T., Allahabad of the claim of the Bank to the tune of Rs. 16, 63, 769.35 vide judgment and order dated 21st February, 2002 in T.A. No.133/ 2000.2. Originally a suit was filed in the Court of Civil Judge, Allahabad by the appellant Bank for recovery of the above mentioned sum against the defendant-respondents and on setting up of the Tribunal under the RDDBFI Act, 1993, the matter came up before the D.R.T., Allahabad and therein the original suit was re-numbered as T.A. No. 133/2000. The claim belongs to the erstwhile Laxmi Commercial Bank which was amalgamated with the appellant-Canara Bank in the year 1985 and merger was on 23rd August, 1985. The proprietary firm of defendant No. 1 having defendant Nos. 2 to 5 as partners took the loan from the Laxmi Commercial Bank in the form of inland letter of credit limit of Rs. 3.00 lacs and hypothecated li...
Usha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union Bank of India (Uoi)
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-2005
Reported in: III(2006)BC243
1. Both the appeals have been heard analogous and judgment is also being passed in common as the matter in issue between the parties are the same and arise out of the same Original Application in T.A. No.380/02. R-482/05 has been preferred by the appellant Nos. 1, 2 and 3, who were originally defendant Nos. 2, 3 and 6 in Original Application while R-519/05 has been preferred by three appellants who were originally defendant Nos. 1, 4 and 5 respectively in the original application. R-482/05 is against the dismissal order dated 23rd December, 2004 passed in M.A. No. 103/03, whereby and whereunder the application filed by the appellants i.e. defendant Nos. 2,3 and 7 for setting aside the ex pane judgment passed on 13th March, 2003 in T.A.No. 380/02, while R519/ 05 has been preferred by the original defendant Nos. 1, 4 and 5 and applicants in misc. application No. 69/03 disposed of on 28th January, 2004 for review of. the order passed in misc.application being Review Application No. 01/04...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›