Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Shri.Sunil Kumar Poddar vs Canara Bank on 29 December, 2011

                       Central Information Commission, New Delhi
                             File No.CIC/SM/A/2011/000045
                  Right to Information Act­2005­Under Section  (19)




Date of hearing                       :                               29 December 2011


Date of decision                      :                               29 December 2011



Name of the Appellant                 :    Shri Sunil Poddar
                                           Shrawan Bazar, House No. 472,
                                           Munger, Bihar.


Name of the Public Authority          :    CPIO, Canara Bank,
                                           Circle Office, Delhi, 7th Floor,
                                           Ansal Tower, 38, Nehru Place,
                                           New Delhi - 110 019.



      The Appellant was represented by Shri P.S. Singhal & Shri Sanyam 
Khetrapal.

        On behalf of the Respondent, the following were present:­
        (i)      Shri P.R. Deo, AGM,
        (ii)     Shri S.V. Kumar, Manager,
        (iii)    Shri R.K. Oberoi, Manager



Chief Information Commissioner                 :       Shri Satyananda Mishra



2. Both   the   parties   were   present   during   the   hearing   and   made   their  submissions.

3. The Appellant had sought a number of information regarding the auction  sale   of  a   particular  property  for  recovery  of  some  loan.  The   CPIO  had  not  CIC/SM/A/2011/000045 provided   any   information   by   claiming   that   the   queries   did   not   amount   to  information within the meaning of Section 2 (f) of the Right to Information (RTI)  Act. The Appellate Authority had endorsed the decision of the CPIO.

4. After carefully considering the submissions made by both the parties and  the facts of the case, we are of the view that the following information should be  disclosed:

i) the photocopies of the entire correspondence made between the bank and  the successful bidder or any other third parties concerning the auction sale of  the property;
ii) photocopy of the letter, if any, received from the DDA cancelling the lease of  the said property;
iii) the photocopy of the auction notice;
iv) the photocopy of the letter forwarding the title documents; and
v)   the   photocopy  of   the   Allahabad   High   Court  order,   if   any,   liquidating   the  company concerned.

5. We direct the CPIO to provide the above information to the Appellant  within 10 working days of receiving this order.

6. The appeal is disposed off accordingly.

7. Copies of this order be given free of cost to the parties. CIC/SM/A/2011/000045 (Satyananda Mishra) Chief Information Commissioner Authenticated true copy.  Additional copies of orders shall be supplied against  application and payment of the charges prescribed under the Act to the CPIO of this  Commission.

(Vijay Bhalla) Deputy Registrar CIC/SM/A/2011/000045