Partly allowed

Bank of India v. Elkon Pvt. Ltd.

DRT18 Jan 2023OA/36/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal permitted the applicant, Bank of India, to withdraw its original application for recovery after the parties settled the dispute under the Office of the Trade Scheme (OTS). Subsequently, the original application was dismissed as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to terminate proceedings by allowing withdrawal of the Original Application. The Original Application subsequently stands dismissed as withdrawn.

Bank of India versus Elkon Pvt. Ltd. — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI

¶2

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)

¶3

Sr. No.10

¶4

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.62 of 2023

¶5

In ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.36 of 2023

Bank of India

… Applicant

Versus

M/s. Elkon Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. … Defendants

¶10

Mr Prashant Shinde i/b M/s. A.B. Shinde & Co. – Advocates for the applicant.

¶11

None for defendants.

¶12

^th January 2023.

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The applicant applied under Section 19(1) to recover Rs.4.22 crores form the defendants. During the Original Application’s pendency (15^th September 2018), the parties have amicably settled the matter based on the OTS scheme propounded by the applicant. Mr Shinde would submit that the applicant gave defendants benefit of OTS Scheme firstly by letter dated 29^th December 2020 and secondly under the BOI OTS 2021 Scheme. He further submits that the applicant has received a sum of Rs.2.47 crores under the aforesaid scheme in full and final satisfaction of the applicant’s claim. On 31^st January 2022,

¶15

Page 1 of 3

¶16

the applicant issued no due certificate to defendants. Mr Shinde, therefore, seeks the Tribunal’s permission to to terminate the proceeding by allowing the withdrawal of the Original Application. Permission granted.Mr Shinde does not press for the relief in terms of prayer clause(b) concerning refund of court fees. Therefore, the question of granting relief does not arise.

¶17

Interlocutory Application No.62 of 2023 is allowed with no order as to costs.

¶18

Sd/-

¶19

(Deepak M. Thakkar) Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai

¶20

Radhika

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI

¶23

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)

ORDER SHEET

18.01.2023

Sr. No.10

lassify- cation	No. of Exh.	OA No.36 of 2023 Bank of India Vs. M/s. Elkon Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
		Mr Prashant Shinde i/b M/s. A.B. Shinde & Co. – Advocates for the applicant. None for defendant.
		1. Order in Interlocutory Application No.62 of 2023 passed separately. 2. In view of the order passed in I.A. No.62 of 2023, Original Application No.36 of 2023 stands dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs.
Radhika		Sd/- Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai

¶28

Page 3 of 3

Bank of India v. Elkon Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bank of India v. Elkon Pvt. Ltd.

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

Mrs Surbhi Janak Katakia versus Tata Capital Financial Service Limited

Mr Rajesh Mohan Solanki and Ors. versus Cholamandalam Invesment and Finance Limited

Canara Bank versus Ummed Singh Rathore

Bank of India versus MIlan Hardikar

Sukumar Shah versus Indian Overseas Bank

Deepakkumar Babulal Trivedi versus Bharat Cooperative Bank Mumbai Limited