Allowed

Savita Sanjay Dhakane v. Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

DRT12 Sept 2023MA/56/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal dismissed the securitisation application on merits due to counsel absence. In this application, the Presiding Officer quashed that dismissal, restored the file to its original stage, and directed notification to the respondent, condoning the procedural default of the applicant.

What did the court decide?

Misc. Application allowed; Securitisation Application No. 14/2022 restored to original stage.

Savita Sanjay Dhakane versus Cholamandalam Investment and… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL,AURANGABAD

¶2

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD)

¶3

ORDER SHEET

¶4

12 Sr	.09.20 . No.4	23 7 M.A No.56/2023
Classifi cation	No. of Exh.
		MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION No.56/2023 Savita Sanjay Dhakane ..Applicants Versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd. & others ..Respondents Mr. A.G.Deshmukh -Advocate for the applicant. The matter is taken through Video Conference. 1. Securitisation Application dismissed on 13.7.2023. Both counsel are not appeared on 16.06.2023 reason given in technical fault. There is no question of any technical fault. The proceedings are going on through VC and hybrid and any one could have come and appear personally also before this Tribunal. 2. If the Learned counsel for the applicant could not appear he should be intimated to his clients that he could not appear. Though the son of advocate Mr. A.G.Deshmukh was admitted in hospital, the other advocate has to appear before this Tribunal. 3. However, looking in to the difficulty of main counsel, I pass the following order : ORDER A. Misc. Application No.56/2023 is allowed. B. Registry is directed to restore the Securitisation Application no. 14/2022 at its original stage. C. The applicant is directed to intimate the respondent about the restoration of proceeding. D. Consign the file to the Record Room.
		(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶5

[APK] (MA No.56/2023)

Savita Sanjay Dhakane v. Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savita Sanjay Dhakane v. Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus M/s Smbts Industries through its Partners

Neeta Vitthal Pampatwar versus Union Bank of India

Joshi Freight Carriers versus Jalgaon Janata Sahakari Bank Limited

Mr Sitaram Kashinath Lingayat versus Mahindra Rural Housing Finance Limited

Darshan Training Institute versus Indian Bank

Sandip Panjabrao Wagh versus State Bank of India