Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
Rohit Jain – Appellant
Versus
Indian Bank – Respondent
Judgment :
Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.
1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the 5th defendant and is directed against the order dated July 5, 2024 and September 4, 2024 both passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal at Kolkata in Appeal Diary no. 502 of 2024.
2. By the order dated July 5, 2024, the petitioner was directed to make a pre-deposit of 25% of the amount of debt due from him within a certain time limit. By the order dated September 4, 2024, the appeal being Diary No. 502 of 2024 was dismissed as not maintainable as the order dated July 5, 2024 directing pre-deposit to be made was not complied with.
3. Indian Bank being the opposite party no. 1 herein, as applicant filed an application before the learned Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati (North Eastern Region) (for short “DRT”) under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (for short “the RDBFI Act, 1993”) being O.A. No. 392 of 2019 praying for issuance of a recovery certificate for a sum of Rs. 8,49,31,576.03/- (Rupees eight crore forty nine lakhs thirty one thousand five hundred seventy six and three paisa) only as on Jul
The jurisdiction for challenging appellate tribunal orders lies in the High Court corresponding to the original tribunal's location, affirming the principle that appellate orders merge with original ....
The jurisdiction of a High Court under Article 227 pertains only to the Debts Recovery Tribunal located within its territorial limits, not an appellate tribunal for matters originating outside its ju....
The territorial jurisdiction for hearing writ petitions under Article 227 is determined by the location of the original authority, not the appellate authority, as mandated by administrative rules.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limitation of the High Court's jurisdiction under Article 227, the principles of contract law regarding mutual consent in altering contracts, a....
Principal Seat retains jurisdiction over writ challenging appellate tribunal order within its territory despite origin in Circuit Bench district; no ouster or mandatory transfer under Rule 3A as appe....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the jurisdiction of the High Court to hear the petition under the Arbitration Act, IAAP No. 106 of 2016, is restored in view of the decision o....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
