Bhagyodaya Friends Urban Co-op, Bank Ltd. and ors. vs Vasant R. Devghare on 28 October 2026

Sr. No. 09 FARAD DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL - MUMBAI DIARY NO. 07 OF 2026 (REVIEW APPLICATION) Date 28.10.2026 ROZNAМА Advocate Avanish Deshpande present for the Appellant. None for the Respondents. The learned Advocate for the Appellant is present. The affidavit of service filed on behalf of the Appellant is perused. As per the affidavit, service upon Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 is reported to be complete. In respect of Respondent No. 1, the postal article has been returned with the endorsement "Addressee left without instructions." The learned Advocate for the Appellant relies upon Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, and the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.C. Alavi Haji v. Palapetty Muhammed, (2007) 6 SCC 555, and Madan & Co. v. Wazir Jaivir Chand, (1989) 1 SCC 264 and contested that service upon Respondent is to be treated as complete. However, considering DRT regulations 2024 and as per aforesaid postal endorsement, the learned Advocate for the Appellant is directed to take appropriate steps for effecting substituted service upon Respondent No. 1 by way of publication in newspapers having wide circulation, in accordance with the applicable Regulations and subject to the requisite permission/order of the competent authority. Next Date perty

The Appellant shall file an appropriate application seeking permission for substituted service by newspaper publication, setting out the relevant facts and furnishing the particulars of the proposed newspaper, on or before the next date of hearing. The question of granting permission for substituted service shall be considered upon such application being filed. Adj. for Steps. 09.12.2026 (Prabhupada Panda) Registrar DRAT- Mumbai