Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
ASHOK NANAJI RANDHE vs BANK OF BARODA on 17 November 2020
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD
(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD)
ORDER SHEET
[SBJ] (MA No.3/2020 and SA.No.66/2020) Page 1 of 2
17.11.2020
Sr. No.912 & 913 MA No.3/2020 & SA No.66/2020
Classific
ation
No. of
Exh.
MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No.3/2020
AND
SECURITISATION APPLICATION No.66/2020
Ashok Nanaji Randhe and another
..Applicants
Versus
Bank of Baroda
..Respondent
Mr. M. M. Avhad – Advocate for the applicants Mr. S.R. Vakil – Advocate for respondent.
Due to Covid 19 situation as per guidelines the matter is taken through Video Conference.
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. The Miscellaneous Application No.3/2020 is for condonation of the delay on the ground that the applicant never came to know about the orders passed by the District Magistrate and only came to know on service of the possession notice issued in January, 2020.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the record of the District Magistrate can be verified for the same. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that they have tried to find out the details of the district officers who could not lay hands on the notice or any service of the orders to the applicant.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the respondent- bank has not served the copy of the order to the applicant on its own. M.A. No.3/2020 is disposed off if at any point of time the respondent-bank lays hand on the service of the orders or the service of the petition to the applicant. They can raise this issue at the time of final argument.
4. M.A. No.3/2020 is disposed off.
5. Reply to the S.A. No.66/2020 has been filed by the respondent- bank and the copy of which is given to the applicant.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he wants to file the rejoinder. Let him do so within two weeks.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD (BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD) ORDER SHEET [SBJ] (MA No.3/2020 and SA.No.66/2020) Page 2 of 2
7. Both the parties are directed to file the affidavit of evidence duly marking the exhibits of their documents in the affidavit itself. The same shall be filed through e-drt portal / e-mail.
8. Both the parties may download the order from the web-site which will be treated as a true copy of the order downloaded from the web-site. List this matter for final arguments in S.A. No.66/2020 on 19th January, 2021 through VC.
(Vimal Gupta)
Presiding Officer
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad