The tribunal dismissed the securitisation application due to the applicant's failure to comply with previous orders regarding the deposit of security and possession, issued on 10th October, 2023.
Securitisation Application No.222/2023 stands dismissed for non-compliance of the orders of this Tribunal.
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, AURANGABAD (BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD) ORDER SHEET
| 12. Sr. |
10.20 No.1 |
23 6 SA No.222/2023 |
|---|---|---|
| Classifica tion |
No. of Exh. |
|
| SECURITISATION APPLICATION No.222/2023 Karbhari Sadashiv Sanap ..Applicant Versus Union Bank of India ..Respondent Mr. Vinod Bhide – Advocate for the applicant. Mr. D.Y. Nandedkar – Advocate for the respondent no. 1. Mr. Maheshkumar Katrajkar, Authorised Officer. of the respondent. The matter is taken through Video Conference. 1. In this matter the learned counsel for the respondent bank has drawn my attention to the orders passed on 10thOctober, 2023 for which the stay was granted subject to deposit Rs.2 Lacs (Rupees Two Lacs only) where the applicant was not complied with the directions because the possession somehow not taken. |
||
| 2. In these circumstances because of non-compliance of the orders of this Tribunal, this Securitisation Application has to be dismissed. |
||
| 3. In view of the above, I pass the following order through video conferencing. ORDER A. The Securitisation Application No.222/2023 stands dismissed for non-compliance of the orders of this Tribunal. B. File be consigned to the record room. (Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad |
[SBJ]
(SA No.222/2023) Page 1 of 1
Karbhari Sadashiv Sanap
Union Bank of India
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
