Tribunal allowed interlocutory application for return of original documents upon defendant's consent. Subsequently disposed of the original application based on consent settlement terms, leaving fifth defendant unadjusted.
Order allowed return of documents; Original Application disposed of no order as to costs based on consent settlement.
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.
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI
(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)
Sr. No.18
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.1356 of 2023
In ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.380 of 2023
Indusind Bank Ltd.
… Applicant
Versus
M/s. Padma Hashlights Pvt. Ltd. & … Defendants Ors.
Ms Shweta Tingre i/b M/s. Fortis India Law – Advocates for the applicant. Mr Gabriel Carvallo – officer of the applicant bank.
Mr Asadullah Shaikh – Advocate for defendants.
Mr Pradeep V. Thirukulam – defendant nos. 1 to 3 present in person.
Ms Julie Pradeep Thirukulam – defendant no.4 present in person.
Shri Deepak M. Thakkar Presiding Officer, 21st August 2023.
ORDER
Sd/-
(Deepak M. Thakkar) Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai
Radhika
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI
(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER) ORDER SHEET
21.08.2023 Sr. No.18
OA No.380 of 2023
| classifi -cation |
No. of Exh. |
Indusind Bank Ltd. Vs. M/s. Padma Flashlights Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. |
|---|---|---|
| Ms Shweta Tingre i/b M/s. Fortis India Law – Advocates for the applicant. Mr Gabriel Carvallo – officer of the applicant bank. Mr Asadullah Shaikh – Advocate for defendants. Mr Pradeep V. Thirukulam – defendant nos. 1 to 3 present in person. Ms Julie Pradeep Thirukulam – defendant no.4 present in person. |
||
| 1. Order in I.A. No.1356 of 2023 passed separately. 2. The 1stdefendant company, represented through the director, Mr Pradeep V. Thirukulam. The 2ndand 3rd defendant present in person. Defendant no.4 present in person. The 5thdefendant not present. The applicant and defendants 1 to 4 is arrived at settlement in the sum of Rs.6,48,00,000/-. The parties state that the amount in the sum of Rs.4.75 crores is already paid and has to pay the balance amount as stated in consent terms. The applicant given an undertaking in clause 3(a) to (k) of the consent terms. The undertaking given by the defendants 1 to 4 is accepted. |
||
| 3. The learned counsel for the parties drew the Tribunal’s |
attention to clause 2 of the consent terms states that the 5th defendant is not traceable. The applicant’s counsel, upon instructions of the officer, present in the Court, submits that the Original Application against 5th defendant disposed of. 4. Based on the consent terms, Original Application stands disposed of with no order as to costs. 5. The learned Registrar is directed to return the original documents to the applicant as per the Rules. Sd/Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai
Radhika
Indusind Bank Ltd.
M/s. Padma Hashlights Pvt. Ltd.
M/s. Padma Flashlights Pvt. Ltd.
Deepak M. Thakkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
