Dismissed

Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited v. Vipul Rajendra Shah

DRT22 Apr 2024OA/349/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal allowed an interlocutory application praying for permission to withdraw the original debt recovery application after an amicable settlement. The original application stood dismissed as withdrawn with court fees refunded.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw the Original Application No.349 of 2024. Court fees to be refunded.

Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited versus… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI

¶2

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)

¶3

Sr. No.14

¶4

INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.553 of 2024 In ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.349 of 2024

Encore ARC Pvt. Ltd.

… Applicant

Versus

Vipul Rajendra Shah … Defendant

¶9

Mr Radhika Kabra i/b M/s. Optimus Legal – Advocates for the applicant. None for defendant.

¶10

Shri Deepak M. Thakkar Presiding Officer, 22^nd April 2024.

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Ms Kabra, representing the applicant, submits that the parties have amicably settled the matter for Rs.3.30 crores. It is stated that the court fees is not debited from the borrower’s account and therefore, entitled for refund. Ms Kabra requests the Tribunal to grant permission to withdraw the Original Application. Permission granted.

¶13

Interlocutory Application No.553 of 2024 is allowed with no order as to costs.

¶14

Sd/-

¶15

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

¶16

Radhika

¶17

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI (BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER) ORDER SHEET

¶18

22.04.2024 Sr. No.14

¶19

		OA No.349 of 2024
classifi -cation	No. of Exh.	Encore ARC Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Vipul Rajendra Shah
		Mr Radhika Kabra i/b M/s. Optimus Legal – Advocates for the applicant. None for defendant.
		1. Order in Interlocutory Application No.553 of 2024 passed separately. 2. In view of the order passed in I.A. No.553 of 2024, Original Application No.349 of 2024 stands dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs. 3. The learned Registrar is directed to refund the court fess as per the Rules.
		Sd/- Presiding Officer, DRT-2, Mumbai

¶20

Radhika

Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited v. Vipul Rajendra Shah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited v. Vipul Rajendra Shah

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Icici Bank Limited versus Vishal Vinod Luthira

Icici Bank Limited versus Ravindra Ramdas Khanavkar

Mr Abdul Rehman Gulam Mohamed Patni and Ors. versus Bank of Baroda

Encore Assets Reconstruction Company Private Limited versus M/s. Aero Pharma Pvt. Ltd.

Hdfc Bank versus Purvi Fulchand Jayawala

The Cosmos Co-Op Bank Ltd. versus M/s Indian Home Variations & Distributions LLP