Securitisation Application No.12 of 2023 was dismissed for want of prosecution because the applicants neither appeared personally nor through counsel on the listed date.
Securitisation Application No.12 of 2023 stands dismissed for want of prosecution.
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)
ORDER SHEET
12.05.2023
Sr. No.16
| SA No.12 of 2023 |
||
|---|---|---|
| classify -cation |
No. of Exh. |
Ms/. Aura Advertising & Ors. Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. |
| None for the applicants. Mr Aman Batar i/b Mr Chetan Agarwal – Advocate for defendant. |
||
| 1. On 28thApril 2023, no representation was made by the applicants either personally or through the advocate and therefore the matter is listed |
||
| under caption ‘dismissal’. Even today, no representation is made by the applicants either personally or through the advocate. It appears |
||
| that the applicants are not interested in |
||
| prosecuting the case any further. Hence, |
||
| Securitisation Application No.12 of 2023 stands dismissed for want of prosecution with no order as to costs. |
||
| Sd/- Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai |
Radhika
Ms/. Aura Advertising & Ors.
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
