The Tribunal disposed of an appeal by a third party as infructuous because the creditor bank had settled the loan account and would not proceed against the assets.
The appeal is disposed of as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
BEFORE THE DEBTS RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AT: MUMBAI Present: Mr Justice Ashok Menon, Chairperson I.A. No. 184/2023
In Misc Appeal No. 51/2023
Between
Nisha Krishankumar Mansinghka … Appellant/s V/s.
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. …Respondent/s
Ms. Somya, i/b M/s. T.N. Tripathi & Co., Advocate for Appellant. An Advocate for Respondent is present.
-: Order dated: 16/10/2023:-
The Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent Bank has submitted that the loan account has been settled by the borrower and hence, the subject property is not intended to be proceeded against.
The copy of the mail which has been addressed to the borrower by the bank is produced for information. The appeal is preferred by a third party who is claiming a right over 1/9th share in the assets. In view of the fact that the loan account has been closed, and the bank will not be proceeding against the property, the appeal has now become infructuous.
Hence, the appeal is disposed of as infructuous.
Sd/Chairperson
rm-21
1
Nisha Krishankumar Mansinghka
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
4 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
