Drat Delhi Court January 2002 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.
Corporation Bank Vs. Galaxy Health Care Pvt. Ltd. and
Court: DRAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-22-2002
Reported in: II(2003)BC59
1. This appeal is against final order dated 20.1.1999 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur in O.A.No. 493/98.2. The aforesaid order is an ex parte order as the defendants in the O.A. did not appear before the Tribunal. In this appeal as well, the respondents, who were defendants in the O.A. have not appeared despite notice.3. Under the impugned order, the appellants have been given a decree of Rs. 5,09,422.60 only as against the claim of Rs. 12,60,588.75 by granting interest @ 13.5% per annum only till date of the O.A. pendente lite and future interest @ 13.5% per annum only with quarterly rests has been granted as against the prayer @ 19.38%.4. The appellant Bank is aggrieved with the amount awarded as well as with the rate of interest awarded pendents lite and future.5. Learned Presiding Officer of the Tribunal below has rejected the claim of the appellant for charging interest at a rate higher than 13.5% by observing as follows : (6) Ex. A-5 pr...
S.R. Kapur and Sons Ltd. and ors. Vs. Syndicate Bank
Court: DRAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-15-2002
Reported in: II(2003)BC102
1. This is an appeal against order dated 22.11.2001 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Delhi in O.A. No. 102/96--Syndicate Bank v. S.R.Kapur & Sons Ltd. and Ors.2. By the impugned order, the Learned Presiding Officer of the Tribunal below has sought the appellants to file prescribed fee on the counter-claim, which they are making in the aforesaid O.A. Feeling aggrieved with the order, this appeal has been filed.4. Under Sub-section (9) of Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, a counter-claim under Sub-section (8) of Section 19 shall have the same effect as the cross suit as to enable the Tribunal to pass a final order on the same Original Application both on the claim and counter-claim. The effect of this provision is that the counter-claim also becomes an application under Section 19 of the said Act. Rule 7 of the Debts Recovery Tribunals (Procedure) Rules, 1993 provides for quantum of fees to be paid on every application un...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›