Allowed

Bank of Baroda v. Apollo Organics

DRT27 Sept 2022OA/34/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Interlocutory Application No. 1315/2022, the applicant bank sought permission to withdraw Original Application No. 34/2022 for partial or full recovery of dues. Noting that the entire claimed amount of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- had already been paid by the defendants, the Presiding Officer allowed the withdrawal, dismissed the original application, and ordered the return of documents and refund of cour

What did the court decide?

Interlocutory Application No. 1315/2022 allowed; Original Application No. 34/2022 dismissed; Order for return of documents and refund of court fees passed.

Bank of Baroda versus Apollo Organics — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2022)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD (BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD) ORDER SHEET

¶2

27. Sr.	09.202 No.19	2 OA No.34/2022
Classific ation	No. of Exh.
		INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 1315/2022 IN ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.34/2022 Bank of Baroda ..Applicant Versus M/s. Apollo Organics Through sole Proprietor Mr. Mayur Shyamkant Chavan & others ..Defendants Mr. S. R. Vakil - Advocate for the applicant-bank. None for the defendant. The matter is taken through VC. 1. Mr. S. R. Vakil, advocate for the applicant bank, requested to Registry for listing the matter through video conference due to Covid-19 situation as per extent guidelines. Thus, the matter is placed through Video Conference.
		2. By this interlocutory application the applicant bank seeks permission of this Tribunal to withdraw the
		Original Application for an amount of
		Rs.1,97,32,092/- (Rupees One Crore Ninety-Seven Lacs Thirty-Two Thousand Ninety-Two Only). The applicant submits that the entire amount of Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lacs Only)has been paid by the defendants as full and final and account is closed. 3. The applicant therefore, seeks permission of this Tribunal to withdraw the Original Application. The applicant also seeks return of original documents and

¶3

[SBJ] (OA No.34/2022) Page 1 of 2

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD (BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD)

¶5

ORDER SHEET

¶6

refund of the court fees.
4. The applicant has made out the case for withdrawal of
the original application, return of original documents
and refund of the court fees.
5. In view of the above, I pass the following order
through Video Conference:
ORDER
A. As Bank has recovered its dues the Interlocutory
Application No.1315/2022 is allowed. Original
Application No.34/2022 is dismissed.
B. As per DRT Regulation 25, other Original
documents if any filed be returned.
C. Registry to refund of court fee as per Rule 5 of the
Debts Recovery Tribunal (Refund of Court Fees)
Rules, 2013.
D. Consign the file to the Record Room.
(Vimal Gupta)
Presiding Officer
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶7

[SBJ] (OA No.34/2022) Page 2 of 2

Bank of Baroda v. Apollo Organics

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of Baroda v. Apollo Organics

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Punjab National Bank versus Vijay Bhagwan Pathare

Aakansha Inegration versus Union Bank of India

Aakanksha Integration versus Union Bank of India

Canara Bank versus Shri Premsing Bhagwan Chavan

Canara Bank versus Babu Mohan Bhil

Maharashtra Gramin Bank versus Eknath Shingare