The DRAT heard an appeal filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. The parties reached a settlement; the appellant sought withdrawal. The tribunal recorded the settlement terms and disposed of the appeal as settled.
The appeal was disposed of as settled following the recording of consent terms and withdrawal by the appellant.
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
Misc. Appeal No. 56/2023
Between
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
… Appellant/s
V/s.
Jitendra L. Gupta & Ors.
…Respondent/s
Mr. Sanjay Anabhawane, Advocate for Appellant.
-: Order dated: 08/11/2023:-
The matter is taken up for hearing by way of a praecipe filed by the Appellant for seeking urgent relief.
The parties have settled the matter between them and the consent terms have been filed.
The appeal is being withdrawn.
Hence, the term of settlement is recorded and the appeal is disposed of as settled.
psa-08
Sd/Chairperson
1
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
Jitendra L. Gupta & Ors.
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
