Ms Breeze Aircon v. Union Bank of India
Case brief
What is this about?
No substantive legal proposition decided. The Debt Recovery Tribunal dismissed the application in default as the applicant failed to appear or be represented.
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.
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
SA/166/2022 MS BREEZE AIRCON Vs UNION BANK OF INDIA
19.01.2023 Item No.76
Present: None for the Applicant. Sh.Satish Jaswal, proxy for Sh.Sanjay Dalmia, Counsel for respondent bank. Sh.KPS Dhillon, Counsel for Auction Purchaser.
Case called several times since morning but nobody is appearing on behalf of the applicant. It appears that applicant is not interested in pursuing this matter. Therefore, application filed by the applicant is dismissed in default .
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Chandigarh
MANOJ
MS BREEZE AIRCON
UNION BANK OF INDIA
A S Narang
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court