Dismissed

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) v. E Complex Pvt. Ltd.

DRT28 May 2024OA/28/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal allowed an interlocutory application to amend the original recovery proceeding. Subsequently, it permitted the withdrawal of the main application upon settrel of the matter, dismissing the original application with no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Interlocutory applications allowed; Original Application dismissed as withdrawn; refund of court fees directed.

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) versus E Complex Pvt… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI

¶2

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)

¶3

Sr. No.19

¶4

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.1922 of 2023 In

¶5

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.28 of 2023

¶6

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank)

… Applicant

Versus

E. Complex Pvt. Ltd.

… Defendants

Mr D.B. Sawangikar – Advocate for the applicant.

¶12

Ms Siddhi Vora and Mr Shivshankar P. – Advocates for defendant no.4. None for other defendants.

¶13

Shri Deepak M. Thakkar Presiding Officer, 28^th May 2024.

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The proposed applicant seeks the Tribunal’s leave to amend the Original Application for the reasons set out in it. It is the applicant’s case that the amendment is formality. The applicant received Rs.72,03,300/- and intends to withdraw the Original Application. Ms Vora, representing the 4^th defendant, does not object to the amendment application.

¶16

By consent, Interlocutory Application No.1922 of 2023 is allowed with no order as to costs.

¶17

Sd/-

¶18

(Deepak M. Thakkar) Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai

¶19

Radhika

¶20

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI

¶21

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)

¶22

Sr. No.19

¶23

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.971 of 2024

¶24

¶25

ORIGINAL APPLICATION

¶26

NO.28 of 2023

¶27

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank)

¶28

… Applicant

¶29

Versus

¶30

E. Complex Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. … Defendants

¶31

Mr D.B. Sawangikar – Advocate for the applicant.

¶32

Ms Siddhi Vora and Mr Shivshankar P. – Advocates for defendant no.4. None for other defendants.

¶33

Shri Deepak M. Thakkar Presiding Officer, 28^th May 2024.

¶34

ORDER

¶35

The parties have settled the matter as per the NCLT order for Rs.72,03,300/-. The applicant’s counsel requests the Tribunal to allow it to permit the Original Application’s withdrawal. Permission granted.

¶36

By consent, Interlocutory Application No.971 of 2024 is allowed with no order as to costs.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

(Deepak M. Thakkar) Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai

¶39

Radhika

¶40

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI

¶41

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)

¶42

ORDER SHEET

¶43

28.05.2024 Sr. No.19

¶44

OA No.28 of 2023

¶45

classifi- cation	No. of Exh.	Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) Vs. E Complex Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
		Mr D.B. Sawangikar – Advocate for the applicant. Ms Siddhi Vora and Mr Shivshankar P. – Advocates for defendant no.4. None for other defendants.
		1. Orders in I.A. No.1922 of 2023 and I.A. No.971 of 2024 passed separately. 2. The applicant to carry out the amendment as per the Rules.
		3. In view of the order passed in I.A. No.1922 of 2023 and I.A. No.971 of 2024, Original Application No.28 of 2023 stands dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs. 4. The learned Registrar is directed to refund the court fees as per the Rules.
		Sd/- Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai

¶46

Radhika

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) v. E Complex Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India (Corporation Bank) v. E Complex Pvt. Ltd.

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

Icici Bank Limited versus Manish

Icici Bank Limited versus Vineet

Icici Bank Limited versus Iqbal

Mr Pritpal Harbhajan Khanuja versus India Bulls Housing Finance Limited

Maya Arun Sureka versus Asset Care and Reconstruction Enterprise Limited

Suhas Vishnu Kumbhar versus Shriram City Union Finance Ltd.