Drat Allahabad Court February 2006 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
State Bank of India Vs. Chopra Fabricators and
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)BC10
1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 19th May, 2005 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, D.R.T. Allahabad in T.A.No. 112/2000 by which the application filed by the appellant Bank under Order 38 Rule 5 of the CPC has been disposed of by passing an order under Order 38 Rule 6 of the CPC. The appellant had filed original suit before the Civil Judge, Allahabad numbering Original Application No.539/93 for realization of Rs. 1,41,74,528.37 together with interest future and pendente lite and also with cost. In the matured stage of the suit when evidence had already been adduced from the side of the appellant Bank, D.R.T. was set up and the case was transferred to D.R.T., Jabalpur and then again retransferred to D.R.T., Allahabad and was numbered as T.A. No. 112/2000. During the pendency of the suit before the Civil Judge, Allahabad, there was a petition filed in the year 2002 under Order 38 Rule 5 of the CPC from the side of the appellant and there was order for atta...
Hyper Chemicals and Cosmetics Vs. State Bank of Patiala
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-2006
Reported in: II(2006)BC184
1. This appeal has been preferred against the part of the order dated 9.3.2005 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Allahabad in T.A. No. 507/2000, whereby and whereunder the prayer of the respondent Bank for amendment sought of their plaint have been allowed.2. There is a history behind the case. Originally a suit was filed by the respondent Bank against the defendant-appellants for realization of dues. After the Tribunal was set up, firstly the original suit was transferred to DRT, Jabalpur and then to DRT, Allahabad and the case was renumbered as T.A. No. 507/2000. Once the case was decided in favour of the respondent Bank and the counter claim made by the defendant-appellants have been rejected. The appeal was filed against such judgment and order before this Appellate Tribunal, which was numbered as Appeal No. R-294/03. The then Chairperson of this Appellate Tribunal heard the appeal and by order dated 24.3.2004 had set aside the issuance of recovery certificate against ...
NihalbIn Iqbal Vs. Canara Bank
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)BC82
This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 26th July, 2004 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Allahabad in M.A. No.42/03, whereby and whereunder the prayer made by the appellants for recall of the order dated 6th January, 2003 passed in T.A. No. 1387/ 03 has been dismissed.For appreciating the matter in dispute, the brief facts of the case are necessary to be reiterated, which are as under: 1. The respondent-Canara Bank, filed the Original Application No.117/98 for recovery of outstanding dues from the appellants before the DRT, Jabalpur. After setting up of the Tribunal at Allahabad the said case was transferred to DRT, Allahabad and was renumbered as T.A. No.1387 of 2000. During the pendency of the proceeding a compromise was effected between the Bank and appellants and as such although no compromise petition was filed, learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Allahabad by order dated 20th June, 2001 dismissed the case of the respondent-Bank taking cognizance of the co...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›