Partly allowed

Shivkrupa Transport v. Axis Bank

DRT8 Nov 2023SA/355/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal rejected the application to condone a 262-day delay in filing an interlocutory application. It registered a securitisation application only regarding physical possession (which was not taken), declared the main application infructuous, and disposed of it accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Interlocutory Application No.1011/2023 dismissed; Securitisation Application No.355/2023 disposed off as infructuous due to lack of physical possession.

Shivkrupa Transport versus Axis Bank — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2023)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD (BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD)

¶2

ORDER SHEET

¶3

08.11.2023

¶4

Sr. No.11 Diary (SA)No. 658/2023 / SA No.355/2023.

¶5

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.1011/2023
IN
Diary (SA)No.658/2023
SECURITISATION APPLICATION NO.355/2023
Shivkrupa Transport ..Applicant
Versus
Axis Bank ..Respondent
Mr. N.B. Patekar - Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Wasif Shaikh h/for Mr. M.D. Narwadkar – Advocate for the
respondent.
The matter is taken through Video Conference.
1. In this matter the applicant has filed the Interlocutory
Application No.1011/2023 there is a delay of 262 days.
2. The respondent bank has filed the reply to the delay
condonation application i.e. Interlocutory Application
No.1011/2023.
3. It is contended by the applicant that they got the knowledge
of the proceedings when they got the physical possession
notice. Physical possession has not been taken.
4. It is contended by the respondent bank that the applicant
not well aware of the proceedings when they received the
symbolic possession notice and they are also in receipt of
the amount order dated 28 th August, 2023.
5. The counsel for the applicant submits that due to lack of
funds they could not file the securitisation application that
cannot be a ground for condoning the delay. The
Classific ation No. of Exh.

¶6

[SBJ] ( Diary (SA)No.658/2023/SA No.355/2023) Page 1 of 2

¶7

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD

¶8

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD)

¶9

ORDER SHEET

¶10

application to condone the delay stands rejected. The
Securitisation Application is registered qua only physical
possession. The physical possession has not been taken as
such this Securitisation Application has become
infructuous and disposed off accordingly.
6. In view of the above, I pass the following order through
video conferencing.
ORDER
A. The Interlocutory Application No.1011/2023 stands
dismissed.
B. The Registry is directed to register the Securitisation
Application qua only physical possession.
C. Accordingly, the Securitisation Application No.355/2023
stands disposed off.
D. File be consigned to the record room.
(Vimal Gupta)
Presiding Officer
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶11

[SBJ] ( Diary (SA)No.658/2023/SA No.355/2023) Page 2 of 2

Shivkrupa Transport v. Axis Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivkrupa Transport v. Axis Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrs Nilofar Raheman Shaikh versus Icici Home Finance Company Limited

Bhumi Enterprises versus Godavari Laxmi Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Manoj Narayan Adhane versus Adarsh Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Vinaykumar Rikhabchand Kothari versus The Malkapur Urban Co-Op Bank Ltd.

Manda Dhondiba Barve versus Mahindra Rural Housing Finance Limited

Bank of Baroda versus Ravindra Dattatraya Dahiwal