Appellant challenged the Debt Collector order under the SARFAESI Act, claiming he never gave a guarantee or created security interest for a loan. The DRT found bank evidence proved the guarantee and security interest. Application dismissed.
SA No.135/2022 dismissed. All pending IAs disposed of.
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.
SA No.135/2022
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
SA NO.135/2022 Mohit Bhandari and another Versus Indian Bank
16.01.2024 Item No.58
Argued by: Sh.Shiv Kumar, Counsel for the Applicants. Sh.RK Jindal, Counsel for Respondent No.1/Bank. Sh.Gaurav Gaur, Counsel for respondent No.2.
Heard on IA No.455/2022
Heard on SA No.135/2022
1
SA No.135/2022
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
DM order. In the present SA, applicant-Mohit Bhandari has challenged the DM order. In substance, the case of the applicant is that he never gave his guarantee and created security interest in favour of the bank.
rule. Thereafter, file be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Pronounced in open court. MANOJ/16.01.2024
(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Chandigarh
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Security Application filed by Mohit Bhandari challenging the Debt Collector order has any merit based on the evidence produced.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohit Bhandari
Indian Bank
A S Narang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
