CANARA BANK Vs. STEELS INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Bank filed the suit before the City Civil Court, Bangalore, in OS-922/1993. After formation of DRT it was transferred to the Tribunal and renumbered as OA 683/1995. THE OA was dismissed for non-representation of the applicant Bank on 9.4.1996. THE applicant Bank filed MA-16/1996 to set aside that dismissal order and the Tribunal dismissed the same on 28.2.2002. Aggrieved against the order the appellant Bank has preferred this Appeal.

(2.) In the order, the Presiding Officer, DRT, has observed that the applicant Bank appointed one Mr. Anand, Law Officer, to handle the case and one Mr. P.V. Aithal was handling the case in City Civil Court and he was aware of the case handled by Mr. Anand and when the case was called on 9.4.1996 neither Mr. Anand nor Mr. Aithal appeared before the Tribunal on account of communication gap and the case came to be dismissed for default. The Presiding Officer, DRT, has found that although one Mr. Prabhu claims that Mr. Aithal was following the case, the same is denied by Mr. Anand and the appellant Bank was incapable of establishing that it was prevented by reasons beyond its control to appear before this Tribunal and so the OA came to be dismissed. As soon as the suit was transferred to the DRT, it is stated that when the case was posted for the first time before the DRT, only the defendants appeared and the applicant Bank was not represented. The defendants filed the Written Statement.

(3.) APPEAL allowed. Order passed by the Presiding Officer, DRT, is set aside. OA-683/ 1995 is restored to file and the Presiding Officer, DRT, Bangalore, is directed to dispose of the OA according to law within a period of three months. Both the parties are directed to appear before the Presiding Officer, DRT, Bangalore, on 11.11.2002.