Drat Allahabad Court May 2007 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.
Bank of India Vs. Gautam Carbon Paper
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: May-24-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC147
1. This appeal arises out of a judgment dated 4th June, 2002 passed by Presiding Officer, D.R.T., Jabalpur (M.P.) in T.A. No. 362 of 1998, Bank of India v. Gautam Carbon Paper Manufacturing Company Pvt. Ltd., issuing recovery certificate for a sum of Rs. 41,56,412.09 and interest as per terms of the contract from 15th May, 1992 till the date of realization, declining to accept the plea of Bank for equitable mortgage.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this appeal as per memo of this appeal are that the appellant Bank of India filed a Civil Suit No.83/1992 against the defendant-respondents for recovery of a sum of Rs. 41,56,412.09 along with interest and costs before the Court of District Judge, Gwalior (M.P.). This suit was transferred to D.R.T., Jabalpur after the constitution of D.R.Ts. and there it was registered as T.A.No. 362/1998. The Bank had pleaded in the above suit that the respondent No. 1 Gautam Carbon Paper Manufacturing Company Pvt. Ltd. on its request was provide...
Praful Steels and anr. Vs. State Bank of India
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: May-18-2007
Reported in: IV(2007)BC1
1. These are two appeals wherein the same point of law is involved and their facts are almost the same, therefore, both these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The Appeal No. 589/2005 has been filed by its appellants Praful Steels and another against a judgment dated 11th August, 2005 passed in T.A. No. 565/2000 by D.R.T., Allahabad, whereas the Appeal No. 591/2005 arises out of a judgment dated 11th August, 2005 passed in T.A. No.532/2000 by D.R.T., Allahabad.3. Brief history giving rise to Appeal No. 589/2005 is that its appellant No. 1 was a proprietorship firm doing its iron and steel trading business at Kanpur. This firm approached respondent No. 1 -Bank in the year 1990 for providing cash credit facility which was sanctioned with a limit of Rs. 3 lacs. An agreement of hypothecation of stock as usual was executed in favour of the respondent Bank. In March, 1994 one person posing himself to be Moolchand Jaiswal along with one other Harish Chand laiswal appro...
Siddharth Rice Mills and ors. Vs. Bank of Baroda
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: May-17-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC32
1. The respondent No. 1-Bank of Baroda instituted an Original Application No. 175 of 2002 under Section 19 of the RDDBFI Act, before D.R.T., Jabalpur for recovery of Rs. 38,61,829.33. The appellant-defendants contested the above Original Application filing their written statement challenging the claim of the respondent No.1-Bank. For the actual short controversy, raised in this case, we need not give the details of pleadings of both parties. In the written statement apart from other pleadings a pleading was raised that the officers of the Bank have acted in most mala fide and fraudulent manner on account of which irreparable loss had been sustained by the appellant-defendants as because of illegal and unauthorised fraudulent transfer of a sum of Rs. 10 lacs from cash credit account to the term loan account. The appellant-defendants pleaded that they had filed criminal complaint case against the Bank officer under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code which was pending before competent ...
Maharaj Ji Education Trust and Vs. Punjab and Sind Bank and ors.
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: May-11-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC6
This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 25th August, 2005 passed by the D.R.T., Lucknow in T.A. No. 333/02 for issuance of recovery certificate for a sum of Rs. 26,75,98,861/- along with pendente lite and future interest @ 16% per annum with quarterly rest from the date of application after adjusting the amount, if any, already deposited + cost.1. Appellant claims to be a public charitable trust registered on 6th January, 1993 at Chennai with its branch at Ghaziabad (U.P.) through Mrs. Kuyilambal wife of late Paramasiyam and Dr. P. Mahalingam with a view to impart medical education by establishing Nursing College, etc.to provide medical help and to plan such activities of the nature of general public utility. Dr. P. Mahalingam was shown as Chairman/Managing Trustee whereas Mrs. Kuyilambal was shown as a trustee. It is said that the purpose of above Trust was to impart medical education and it was running medical colleges in the name and style of Santosh Medical College, Santosh D...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›