Dismissed
Mangesh Prakash Tarte v. Bajaj Finance Ltd.
DRTSA/37/2022
What the court decided
AI extract
Outcome
Dismissed
A compact analysis
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.
¶1
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD (BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD) ORDER SHEET
¶2
| 16 Sr |
.05.20 . No.21 |
23 SA No.37/2022 |
|---|---|---|
| Classifi cation |
No. of Exh. |
|
| SECURITISATION APPLICATION No.37/2022 | ||
| Mangesh Prakash Tarte ..Applicant Versus |
||
| Bajaj Finance Ltd. ..Respondent None for the applicant. Mr. S.R. Vakil - Advocate for the respondent bank. The matter is taken up through VC. 1. In this matter the applicant is not appearing. Even after passed over none appears for the applicant. It appears that the applicants are not interested in pursuing the matter. |
||
| 2. In view of the above, I pass the following order through video conferencing: |
||
| ORDER | ||
| A. The Securitisation Application No.37/2022 stands dismissed in default for non-prosecution. |
||
B. All pending IA in the proceeding if any are disposed of accordingly. |
||
| C. File be consigned to the record room. | ||
| (Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad |
¶3
[SBJ]
¶4
(SA No.37/2022) Page 1 of 1
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- applicant
Mangesh Prakash Tarte
- respondent
Bajaj Finance Ltd.
Coram
AI extract
Vimal Gupta
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court