Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
MANN RICE MILLS vs PUNJAB AND SIND BANK on 17 May 2019
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
MA 42 of 2019
PSB Vs M/s mann Rice through its Proprietor & Ors.
17.05.2019
Item No.1
Present: Ms. Sarmanpreet Kaur Phoolka, Counsel for the Applicant.
The Applicants/Defendants No.1,3,4,5 and 6 have filed this Application for setting aside ex parte proceedings/order against the defendants.
The Applicants/Defendants has stated that earlier one advocate had filed MOA on behalf of them but since the engagement with him could not mature, he did not file vakalatnama. On the date of hearing on 22.02.2019, the Applicants/Defendants could not reach the court in time due to Kissan Dharna and blockage of highway. By the time they reached the court, the Applicants/Defendants had already been proceeded ex parte.
The Applicants/Defendants have thus prayed that it was not their intention to reach late or not to attend the court but it was circumstancial and prayed that the ex parte order dt.22.02.2019 be recalled.
I have heard counsel for the Applicants/Defendants and perused the record.
It has been observed that due notice in the matter was directed to be issued to the Applicants/Defendants on 18.04.2018 to be returned by 11.07.2018. The Notice to the Applicants/Defendants again were directed to be issued vide order dt.28.08.2018 when the Resp./Applicant Bank failed to serve the defendants and the matter was adjourned to 12.12.2018 on which date when the Applicants/Defendants failed to appear even after service, they were set ex parte. However, on filing of MOA by one counsel at a later stage, the order of ex parte was recalled and the Applicants/Defendants were given time to file WS along with Vakalatnama and the matter was adjourned to 22.02.2019. But on 22.02.2019, neither the counsel nor the Applicants/Defendants had appeared nor there was WS filed on record nor Vakalanama. Hence the defendants were rightly set ex parte.
The plea of the Applicants/Defendants that they could not reach in time on 22.02.2019 and became late is not digestible. Believing their statement to be true, if they had reached late, they could have approached the court through Court Master but nothing like that had happened. Moreover, as per their version when they reached court they learnt that they have been proceeded ex parte, they could have file the application on the very next day, i.e., on 23.02.2019 but the present application has been filed on 20.03.2019, i.e., almost a month late which itself refute the contention of the Applicants/Defendants.
Since no ground has been made out by the Applicants/Defendants, MA is dismissed.
File be consigned to record. (Harcharn Singh), Presiding Officer, DRT-I, Chandigarh 21.05.2019/cms