The Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed an application for withdrawal of a recovery certificate filed by State Bank of India after the compromise amount was received. The recovery certificate was dismissed as withdrawn.
MA allowed; RC no. 295 of 2019 dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
| Date of order or proceeding |
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, PATNA Order with the Signature of the Court |
Office action taken with data |
|---|---|---|
| MA 141 of 2022 State Bank of India Vs Bhim Paswan and others Present: Shri S.K. Singh Ld. counsel for the applicant None for the respondent |
||
| 15.09.2022 | This Miscellaneous Application has been filed by applicant seeking permission to withdraw the RC no. 295 of2019 in OA no.846 of2018. It is stated therein that the matter has been compromised and the compromise amount has been received by the applicant bank. This application is supported by an affidavit of Shri Shashi Ranjan Choudhary S/o Shri Krishna Dev Chooudhary, Chief Manager, SBI, SARB Patna which substantiates the contents of the application. It is also supported by a copy of letter dated 31.5.2022 address to Shri S.K. Singh ld. counsel for the applicant bank with instructions to withdraw the OA in question. Under the circumstances, the MA stands allowed and RC no.295 of 2019 is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. Original documents, if any lying with the Tribunal be returned to the applicant bank as per rule. Consigned the record. A Copy of order be sent to the parties and Ld. Recovery Officer for necessary action. Order be uploaded on the Tribunal's website. r>:\1 L" (Kaushalendra Yadav) Presiding Officer Patna |
y
State Bank of India
Bhim Paswan and others
Kaushalendra Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
