Drat Allahabad Court July 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.
Shiva Technomec (P) Ltd. Vs. Dena Bank
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-2005
Reported in: II(2006)BC50
1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 17th September, 2003 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Jabalpur in Original Application No. 75/02, whereby and whereunder the application filed by the appellants who were defendant Nos. 1 to 7 for cross-examination of the applicant-Bank's witnesses has been rejected.2. The original application was filed by the respondent-Dena Bank on 11th January, 2002 and along with the application, affidavits of the witnesses for the Bank sworn on 11th January, 2002 have been filed after service of notice on the defendant-appellants, they filed their written statement taking various objections regarding the plaint case both on facts and on points of law. Some of the vital objections raised have been sought to be clarified by the respondent Dena Bank by filing rejoinder on 15th September, 2002 and such rejoinder was filed with the support of an affidavit sworn by one Mr. Niranjan Tarai who happened to be the Senior Manager of the c...
Kamal Kishore Gupta Vs. State Bank of India
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-2005
Reported in: II(2006)BC177
1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment/order dated 23rd July, 2004 passed by Mr. K.D. Khan, Presiding Officer, D.R.T., Jabalpur in appeal No. 9/2004, where by and where under the order dated 23rd March, 2004 passed by the Recovery Officer in T.A. Execution No. 49/ 2000 has been set aside by exercising jurisdiction under Section 30(1) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter shall be called as the RDDBFI Act). By the impugned order the learned Presiding Officer, D.R.T., Jabalpur as an Appellate Court has held that the order of the Recovery Officer setting aside the auction sale is illegal and inoperative in the eye of law. The respondent-State Bank of India filed a suit in the District Court at Sahjahanpur for realizing of Rs. 12,59,5897- against the appellant and others. On setting up of the Tribunal as per the RDDBFI Act the said civil suit was transferred to the Tribunal at Jabalpur and registered at T.A. No. 160/98. The...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›