SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

VIKASH JAIN
HDFC Bank Ltd. through Jayanta Banerjee – Appellant
Versus
Rakesh Kumar Verma – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Girijish Kumar, Adv.
For the O.P. : Mr. Bibhakar Tiwary, Adv.

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite party through video conference.

I.A. No. 1 of 2020

2. I.A. No. 1 of 2020 has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the present civil revision application. It is submitted that as a matter of fact, the main reason for delay is that the petitioner was pursuing its remedy before this Court in Civil Misc. Jurisdiction No. 256 of 2019 filed on 30.01.2019 and disposed of on 25.02.2020.

3. Learned counsel for the opposite party appears and states that he has no serious objection if the delay is condoned and the matter is disposed of on merits.

4. Having regard to the reasons stated in the limitation petition, the same stands allowed and the delay in filing the present civil revision application is hereby condoned.

C.R. No. 23 of 2020

5. The present civil revision petition has been filed “for setting aside the order dated 14.12.2018, passed by the court of Subordinate Judge-XII, Patna, in Title Suit No. 212 of 2017, whereby the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 read with the Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for the brevity “the Code”) was rejected, wh

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top