Back
DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
G. Chandrasekharan, CJ
Sri Sreekumar, Mrs. Shalini N. Menon – Appellant
Versus
Canara Bank, M/s Srishti Components, Smt. Preetha Menon, Mr. C. Naresh Babu, Mr. T. Janeeth Kumar, Sri C. Raghavendra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. ex parte proceedings and liability of partners (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. arguments regarding liability and retirement (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. consideration of rival submissions (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. reconstitution of partnership and communication (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. analysis of partnership liability (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 7. public notice requirement for retirement (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 8. legal interpretation of notice requirements (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 9. liability of partners post-retirement (Para 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 10. final determination of liability (Para 30 , 31) |
| 11. conclusion and order (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
ORDER
1. This appeal is filed under Section 20 of RDDB & FI Act against the order passed by Learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Bangalore in OA No.1458/2013 on 27.1.2016.
2. Respondents 3 and 4 before the Tribunal below are the appellants. The first respondent bank filed OA 1458/2013 against respondents therein for recovery of an aggregate sum of Rs.41,32,064.05p. towards Term Loan of Rs.24,96,059.69p together with interest at 18.25 % p.a with monthly rests and Over Draft amount of Rs. 16,36,004.36p together with interest at 16
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
