MS OM SAI TRADERS vs CANARA BANK on 30 November 2022

<table border="1"><thead><tr><th data-bbox="121 114 201 138">DATE</th><th data-bbox="201 114 686 138">DESCRIPTION OF THE ORDER</th><th data-bbox="686 114 878 138">REMARK</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td data-bbox="121 138 201 967">MA 25/22<br/>30/11/22</td><td data-bbox="201 138 686 967"><p>Shri Akhilesh Choubey, Adv for the Applicants<br/>None for the Non-applicant Bank</p><p>1. On perusal of record it reveals that non-applicant Bank is served on 27/07/22 acknowledgment of the Respondent-Bank is on record and registry has also declared service of non-applicant as per registry endorsement dated 29/08/22 now the non-applicant bank is proceeded ex-parte for hearing on this MA.</p><p>2. On matter being taken up for hearing a question being asked to Applicant Counsel under which provision this application is to be heard.</p><p>3. Applicant Counsel submits that as per provision of section 22(2) (g) of RDB Act 1993 this Tribunal has power to restore this SA which has been dismissed for want of prosecution.</p><p>4. Though the applicants have filed this application under the provision of order 9 Rule 9 of CPC but it is well settle that application shall be considered as per relief prayed but not as per provision coded.</p><p>5. Therefore matter is being heard finally.</p><p>6. Applicant Counsel submits that SA No.385/22 was fixed for hearing on 23/06/22 but on that day Applicant Counsel Shri C. L. Soni could not appear on call and the</p></td><td data-bbox="686 138 878 967"></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table border="1"><thead><tr><th data-bbox="132 111 211 134">DATE</th><th data-bbox="211 111 686 134">DESCRIPTION OF THE ORDER</th><th data-bbox="686 111 879 134">REMARK</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td></td><td><p>applicant no.2 was busy for treatment of her daughter.</p><p>7. Grounds mentioned under the application have also been supported by affidavit of applicant.</p><p>8. Certified copy of order dated 23/06/22 passed by this Tribunal is on record.</p><p>9. On perusal of order it reveals that on 23/06/22 when the matter was call for hearing non-applicant counsel was present but the applicant side was absent, therefore SA No. 385/22 had been dismissed with this observation that continuously on two dates of hearing no one appeared on behalf of the applicant which reflects that the applicants side having no interest to prosecute this SA further.</p><p>10. Since applicants have filed this restoration application on 04/07/22 just after 11 days since dismissal of the SA, it shows that in fact applicants having interest to prosecute their matter, that is to say SA No. 385/22.</p><p>11. But on the day fixed for hearing the SA inadvertently Applicants Counsel could not appear and applicant no.2 also for a sufficient reason could not appear, in fact she was not expected to appear in person since counsel was engaged for the applicants.</p><p>12. Respondent Counsel chooses not to appear in this MA, therefore nothing on record to controvert the contention of the application</p><p style="text-align: center;"></p></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

<table border="1"><thead><tr><th data-bbox="52 128 148 155">DATE</th><th data-bbox="148 128 722 155">DESCRIPTION OF THE ORDER</th><th data-bbox="722 128 954 155">REMARK</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td data-bbox="52 155 148 968"></td><td data-bbox="148 155 722 968"><p>and affidavit submitted by the applicant side therefore looking to sufficient reason assigned by the applicant side, and supported by the affidavit, in opinion of this Bench the applicants have shows sufficient cause to non appearance on 23/06/22 when SA No.385/22 was taken for hearing.</p><p>13. Therefore in the interest of justice application for restoration is hereby allowed as per provision of section 22(2)(g) of the RDB Act 1993.</p><p>14. Resultantly order passed on 23/06/22 is hereby recalled and SA No.385/22 is hereby restored for further hearing.</p><p>15. Registry is directed to restore the SA No.385/22 on original number and be place for further hearing.</p><p>16. This MA is disposed of accordingly.</p><div data-bbox="438 710 670 855" data-label="Text"><p><br/>(Ram Niwas Patel)<br/><u>Presiding Officer</u><br/>D.R.T, Jabalpur<br/>(M.P &amp; C.G)</p></div></td><td data-bbox="722 155 954 968"></td></tr></tbody></table>