Drat Delhi Court September 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.
inrays Vs. State Bank of India and anr.
Court: DRAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-28-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC67
1. The appellant is M/s. Inrays through Mr. B.S. Kumar. The 1st respondent is the State Bank of India and the 2nd respondent is Mr.Gurnam Singh, the auction purchaser. The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 31.8.2006 passed by the Tribunal below in MA No. 71/2004 arising out of O.A. No. 757/2000. There, M/s. Inrays figured as applicant/defendant No. 1/JD No. 1 and Mr. B.S. Kumar as applicant No.2/defendant No. 2/JD No. 2. By the impugned order, the Tribunal below dismissed their application under Order 9 Rule 13, CPC for setting aside ex parte judgment and recovery certificate dated 24.6.2004 passed in OA No. 757/ 2000. In prayer, however, the appellant has sought the setting aside of the impugned order dated 31.8.2006 as well as the order of the Recovery Officer dated 27.9.2005 (whereby the auction sale was confirmed).2. The relevant facts may be stated briefly. The State Bank of India, respondent-Bank herein filed recovery suit before the Senior Sub-Judge, Faridabad for recove...
Rashpal Singh Vs. Davinder Kaur Sethi and ors.
Court: DRAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-27-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC75
1. The order impugned in this appeal is one dated 5.1.2007 passed by the Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Chandigarh in Appeal 5/2005. The appeal before him had been filed by respondents 1 to 3 herein against the order dated 16.12.2004 passed by the Recovery Officer in R.C. 555/2001 issued pursuant to the order in O.A. 481/ 2001 (old DRT, Jaipur O.A.No. 21/99). The appeal was allowed by the Tribunal below whereby the sale of the property in question to the appellant herein was set aside.2. The relevant facts may be stated briefly. The respondent No. 4 herein-Punjab National Bank (applicant in O.A.) had filed O.A. before DRT, Jaipur against M/s. Amrit Cellulose Ltd. (respondent No. 5 herein) and its directors/guarantors including respondents 1 to 3 for the recovery of Rs. 2 crores and odd. Managing Director of the company, namely, Mr. J.S. Sethi died after the O.A. was filed and the respondents 1 to 3 herein were his legal heirs, too, besides being guarantors/mortgagors. The O.A. was allowed ...
Morion Chemicals Ltd. and ors. Vs. Uco Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: DRAT Delhi
Decided on: Sep-19-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC46
1. The respondent Nos. 2 to 4 (M/s. Morion Chemicals Ltd., Mr. Jai Bhagwan Bansal and Mr. Sanjay Bansal respectively) in S.A. No. 3/2007 (pen ding before the Tribunal below) have filed this miscellaneous appeal against the order dated 23.5.2007 passed by the Tribunal below dismissing their IA No. 140/2007.2.1 have heard Mr. Deepak Arora, learned Counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. Rajesh Rattan, learned Counsel for the respondent Bank.3. The relevant facts may be stated briefly. The appellant No. 1 (M/s.Morion Chemicals Ltd.) is a company incorporated under the Companies Act. Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 (Mr. Bhagwan Bansal and Mr. Sanjay Bansal) are the Directors of the appellant No. 1 company. They are mortgagors also. Certain loan and credit facilities were sanctioned to the appellant No. 1 by the respondent-Bank Mr. Sunil Dutt Bansal, respondent No. 3 herein is also said to be the Director and mortgagor who allegedly committed certain financial irregularities including diversion o...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›