Drat Delhi Court February 2002 Judgments

Smt. Saraswati Devi Gupta Vs. State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and

Court: DRAT Delhi

1. This is an application moved by the appellant in Appeal No. 249/2001 for condonation of delay in filing the appeal against order dated 31.8.2001. From the certified copy of the impugned order filed, it transpires that application for a certified copy was moved on 3.9.2001 and the same was delivered to the appellant on 10.9.2001. Since time for filing the appeal is 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the impugned order, the appeal could be filed in time by 23.10.2001.In fact, the appeal has been filed on 16.11.2001, making a delay of about 25 days.2. The grounds for condonation of delay, as have been taken in this application, are that from 23.9.2001 till 20.10.2001, the appellant was seriously sick and was suffering from acute depression and drowsiness.A certificate to that effect has been filed. It has been averred that when the appellant was in a position to sign the memorandum of appeal, it reached her Counsel at Delhi after signature on 25.10.2001 and by that date, ...

Cross Country Hotels Ltd. Vs. Tourism Finance Corporation of

Court: DRAT Delhi

Reported in: I(2003)BC66

1. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing Appeal No.209/2001 in which Orders dated 25.5.2001 and 12.10.2001 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Delhi in O.A. No. 26/2000 have been challenged. Since this appeal was filed on 7.11.2001, this application for condonation of delay in filing appeal against order dated 25.5.2001 has been moved. The ground, inter alia, taken in this application is that after order dated 25.5.2001 was passed, an application for review of that order was made and the same was disposed of only on 12.10.2001.Hence the prayer is that the delay in filing appeal against order dated 25.5.2001 may be condoned.2. Reply to this application has been filed. Heard learned Counsels for the parties.3. Though appeal against order dated 25.5.2001 ought to have been filed in lime but in view of the fact that, under advice, the appellant had moved an application for review of order dated 25.5.2001 and that application was disposed of only on 12.10.2001. I c...

B.D. Viz and Sons Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Bank of India

Court: DRAT Delhi

Reported in: II(2003)BC94

1. This application under Section 21 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 was moved along with the memorandum of appeal and therein it was prayed that the appellants be exempt from depositing the amount as held due by the Tribunal below.The appeal was filed in the year 1998.2. By application No. 201/2001, additional grounds have been taken for exemption under Section 21 of the said Act. Replies have been filed and the pleadings are complete.4. This appeal was filed before Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai against the final order made by DRT, Jaipur in O.A. No. 827/96 whereunder a decree of Rs. 55,22,559 has been passed with future interest @ 17.5% p.a. with quarterly rests from 25.8.94 till realization.5. My learned predecessor, Mr. Justice V.R. Datar, Chairman of DRAT, Mumbai passed an order dated 4.10.99 wherein he directed the execution to be stayed until further orders on condition that the appellants would deposit Rs. 10 lakhs. The op...

Indian Bank Vs. Ajay India and ors.

Court: DRAT Delhi

Reported in: II(2003)BC54

1. This appeal is against order dated 30.6.1999 passed by DRT, Delhi in O.A. No. 67/95, Indian Bank v. Ajay India and Ors.2. By the impugned order, a final order has been passed in the aforesaid O.A. and adecree of Rs. 35,57,268.94 has been passed.However, in the circumstances mentioned in affidavits filed before the Tribunal, pendente life interest has been waived and future interest has been awarded @ 12% p.a. till realization of the entire amount. By the impugned order, it has been directed that the decretal amount shall be paid in 16 equal quarterly instalments and in the event of failure on the part of the defendants, the entire amount shall become payable immediately along with contractual rate of interest. According to the impugned final order, the instalments shall commence from 1.9.1999. The appellant Bank is aggrieved with the impugned order and the same has been challenged on the following three points, namely-- 2. the pendente lite interest should not have been waived and ...