Dismissed

Ms Balaji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal v. Abhyudaya Cooperative Bank Limited

DRT6 Jun 2024SA/183/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal disposed of a Securitisation Application by the applicant for delay tactics. Noting previous dismissals for non-prosecution and lack of compliance with prior orders, the Tribunal dismissed the current application and all associated interlocutory applications.

What did the court decide?

Securitisation Application No.183/2024 dismissed; all pending Interlocutory Applications disposed off; File consigned to record room.

Ms Balaji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal versus Abhyudaya… — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD

¶2

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AURANGABAD) ORDER SHEET

¶3

06.06.2024

¶4

Sr. No.17 SA No.183/2024

¶5

Classifica tion	No. of Exh.
		SECURITISATION APPLICATION No.183/2024 M/s. Balaji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal ..Applicant Versus Abhyudaya Co-operative Bank Limited ..Respondent Mr. K.J. Suryawanshi - Advocate for the applicant. Mr. S.S. Deve – Advocate for the respondent bank. The matter is taken through Hybrid. 1. I have heard the arguments. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant has submitted that there are payments are being due as against the hospital from government departments. 3. The payments which he is submitting, is due from the various authorities. Those payments can be attached by the respondent
		bank under Securitisation Act which permits them to attach and get the payment directly. 4. All the points taken by the applicant in this Securitisation Application already been dealt with in the earlier Securitisation Applications which was dismissed for non-prosecution therefore order in the earlier Securitisation Application to deposit

¶6

[SBJ] (SA No.183/2024) Page 1 of 3

¶7

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL,

¶8

AURANGABAD

¶9

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AURANGABAD)

¶10

ORDER SHEET

¶11

Rs.50 Lacs (Rupees Fifty Lacs only) while quashing the orders of the Circle Officer to take possession. Thereafter that compliance was not made since 2022 till date.

¶12

The Tribunal is not interested in granting any interim relief. 6. Let the bank take possession. If the applicant wants to settle the matter the respondent bank will be at liberty.

¶13

In view of the fact that the account has become NPA in 2014, two Securitisation Applications have been dismissed for nonprosecution. It is only nothing but delaying tactics.

¶14

The Bank is trying hard. The Co-operative Banks are facing hardship because of such unscrupulous borrower who are making of non-efforts to make the payments.

¶15

The Tribunal is not interested in granting any sort of indulgence as it has been stated by the applicant that this Tribunal granted then the liberty to take all the objections whereas the order placed by them does not show the same.

¶16

10.I have gone through the order placed by the applicants at Page No.52. There is no liberty granted to them and the amount which was ordered to be paid which has not been paid.

¶17

11.The counsel has also placed an order passed in Securitisation Application No.103/2024 at Page 53 that Tribunal does not know why the same is filed. The Securitisation Application No.58/2022 was dismissed by the Tribunal as the same technique was adopted by the applicant by not representing the

¶18

[SBJ] (SA No.183/2024) Page 2 of 3

¶19

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD

¶20

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AURANGABAD)

¶21

ORDER SHEET

¶22

matter on various dates. The said Securitisation Application No.58/2022 was dismissed. No liberty was granted. 12.The statement made in this Securitisation Application No.183/2024 is misleading and as such shall liable to be dismissed. 13.In view of the above, I pass the following order. ORDER A. The Securitisation Application No.183/2024 stands dismissed. B. Accordingly, all the pending Interlocutory Applications stand disposed off. C. File be consigned to the record room. (Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶23

[SBJ] (SA No.183/2024) Page 3 of 3

Ms Balaji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal v. Abhyudaya Cooperative Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ms Balaji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal v. Abhyudaya Cooperative Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sagar Fruit Company Through it Proprietor versus Ms Bajaj Finance Limited

Jagannath Garments versus State Bank of India

Rajheramb Proprerties versus the Jalgaon Peopels Cooperative Bank Limited

Union Bank of India versus Vishal Nilkanthrao Pawade

Dinkar so Madhukar Nikam versus Icici Home Finace Company Ltd.

Dineshkumar Murlidhar Inani versus Poornawadi Nagrik Sahakari Bank