Back
CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
Anandi Ramalingam, IC
Ajay Mehra – Appellant
Versus
CPIO: Canara Bank, Karnataka – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. information sought related to rti processes. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. first appeal upheld cpio's responses. (Para 3) |
| 3. no infirmity in the cpio's reply. (Para 8) |
| 4. appeal dismissed based on the nature of rti requests. (Para 9) |
Hon’ble Commissioner _ANANDI RAMALINGAM O R D E R
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 29.12.2023 seeking information on the following points:
1. “Kindly provide me with the information regarding the process followed by a branch of Canara Bank when vacating a leased premises, especially when there are 3 landlords.
2. Provide me with the information on the standard notice period required to be followed by any branch of Canara Bank for notifying landlords about their physical presence at day of vacant possession.
3. During vacant possession, do you require the presence as well as signature of all 3 landlords? And is there any other additional paperwork or process that requires the physical presence of all 3 landlords of the said leased property.
4. Provide clarity that is it mandatory for all the 3 landlords to be present at the time of vacant possession? And if even 1 of the 3 landlords isn't present, does the bank send any form of written commun
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
