The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal dismissed an appeal challenging SARFAESI measures as infructuous because the demand notice u/s 13(2) had been withdrawn, rendering the challenge unsustainable. Neither party appeared at the hearing.
The appeal was dismissed 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. 584/2023 (WoD)
In
Appeal on Diary No. 1414/2023 Between
Ritu Abhijeet Pawar … Appellant/s V/s.
The Authorized Officer, State Bank of India
…Respondent/s
Mr. Kushal Sawant, i/b Mr. Vivek Sawant, Advocate for Respondent.
-: Order dated: 13/02/2024:-
There is no representation for the Appellant when the matter stands posted for hearing on the application for waiver of deposit. It is submitted by the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent bank that the demand notice u/s. 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act has since been withdrawn.
Therefore, the challenge to the Sarfaesi measures would no longer be sustainable.
In view of the subsequent events, the appeal has become infructuous and hence, dismissed.
Misc. Applications, if any, are dismissed as infructuous.
Sd/Chairperson
rm-4
1
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ritu Abhijeet Pawar
The Authorized Officer, State Bank of India
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
4 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
