Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed an application in default for non-prosecution after the applicant failed to appear on the last date of hearing despite issuance of a default notice.
The application was dismissed in default for non-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.
;i':r
t.'
Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi
sA 14612023 AVNISH KUMAR VS SHUBHAM HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE COMPANYLTD
Lt.12.2023
Item no. 43
Present: None for applicant.
Mr. Subodh Kumar Singh, Counsel forRespondent FI.
Matter is taken through Video Conferencing.
The ld. Counsel for respondent FIhas submittedthat the matter has been settled betweenthe parties.
None appeared on the last dateof hearing on behalfof the applicant. Despiteissuance ofdefault notice none appears today. It appears that theapplicants are not interested'in pursuing the case. Hence, thepresent SA isdismissedin default for non-prosecution.
File be consigned to records.
€4/ "'i
(SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-II, Delhi
Avnish Kumar
Shubham Housing Development Finance Company Ltd.
Sushil Kumar Rastogi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
