Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
SHRI POPAT MOTIGIR GOSAVI vs BANK OF MAHARASHTRA on 11 February 2025
**Before Arun Kumar Singal, Presiding Officer DRT-III, Navi Mumbai Miscellaneous Application No.120 of 2024**
Presented on : 30.09.2024
Registered on : 04.11.2024
Decided on : 11.02.2025
**Mr. Popat Motigir Gosavi & Ors.**
...APPLICANTS
V/s.
**Bank of Maharashtra & Ors.**
...RESPONDENTS
**Argued By -**
Advocate Mr. J.K. Jadhav for the Applicants.
Advocate Mr. Nikhil Salvi for the Respondent No.1 Bank.
Advocate Mr. Pradeep Bhor for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
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.
**ORDER**
1. 1. This Order of mine shall dispose of the Miscellaneous Application bearing No.120 of 2024.
2. 2. It is the plea of the Applicant that there is delay of 4 months and 10 days in filing the Chamber Appeal in Securitisation Application (Lodg) No.2379 of 2023 and the delay is on account of genuine reasons and there is just and sufficient cause to condone the said delay. The counsel for the Applicants submits the Ld. Registrar erred in passing the impugned Order dt.21.05.2024 declining to grant more time to the Appellants to remove office objections. The Registrar failed to take into consideration that the non-appearance of the Advocate on
*Arun Kumar*
record due to she being on maternity leave was justifiable. The Appellants and their advocates were unaware of the said Order dt.21.05.2024 passed by this Tribunal. The Applicants requested to protect their interest and accordingly present application filed in the Tribunal and for this act, the delay of 4 months and 10 days is there, which was not intentional and accordingly, the Applicants prayed for condonation of delay.
1. 3. In the opinion of this Tribunal, the present application for condonation of delay in filing the Chamber Appeal in Securitisation Application (Lodg) No.2379 of 2023 and the delay is on account of genuine reasons and there is just and sufficient cause to condone the said delay. So, in the interest of justice, present Miscellaneous Application No.120 of 2024 is hereby allowed and the Registry is directed to number Chamber Appeal and put up before the Tribunal for appropriate orders.
*Arun Kumar*
(ARUN KUMAR SINGAL) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-III, MUMBAI
Typed By - S S Bhawale, PS