Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Limited vs Shrenuj & Company Limited on 19 October 2023
DRT1 MUMBAI
CA 7 of 2022
19/10/2023
Ex.
No.
Before Presiding Officer Dr. Rekha G. Dhakar, DRT-1, Mumbai.
Roznama in CA 7 of 2022
JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company Limited Vs Shrenuj & Company Limited Next date Advocate Dhruv Dandekar i/b Desai &
Diwanji appeared for the Appellant.
Advocate Yahta Batatawala a/w Advocate
Uma
Chatterjee appeared for the Official
Liquidator.
Advocate Fatima Barodawalla a/w Sejal
Khandekar appeared for the Court Receiver.
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.
1. Heard on Chamber Appeal.
2. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant has raised various objections and stated that the claim of the Appellant may be decided by this tribunal.
3. Ld. Counsel for the Liquidator as well as the Respondent FI has objected to the present Appeal.
4. Admittedly, the Appellant herein challenged the order dt. 19.04.2022 passed in TA No.407/2016 and seeking to review the said order, however, as per Rule 5A (2) of the DRT Rules 1993, the the review application has to be preferred within 30 days but in the present matter, the present Appeal is filed on 22/11/2022 against the order dt. 19/04/2022, thus, the same is beyond the period of limitation.
5. In terms of the judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Standard Chartered Bank V/s MSTC Ltd
DRT1 MUMBAI CA 7 of 2022 (Manu/SC/0073/2020) the DRT has no power to condone the delay in the Review Application.
6. Even otherwise as rightly stated by Ld. Counsel for the Respondents that the Appellant failed to mention that under which rule the Appellant came before this Tribunal.
7. Further the original application i.e., TA No. 407/2016 has already been disposed off, therefore, the present Chamber Appeal which is filed by an intervenor is not maintainable with this Tribunal.
8. Therefore, in view of the above, there is no merit in the present Chamber Appeal and thus the same is hereby dismissed accordingly. File be closed and consigned to record. P.O. DRT-I SP/-3