Dismissed

Mr Chandrakant Ashok Patil v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

DRT19 Mar 2024SA/241/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant, seeking securitisation of a loan, filed an interlocutory application to amend the application, arguing a discrepancy between the demand notice amount and the possession notice amount. The Presiding Officer dismissed the amendment application accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Interlocutory Application for amendment dismissed; liberty to file a fresh Securitisation Application.

Mr Chandrakant Ashok Patil versus Kotak Mahindra Bank… — Insolvency and Bankruptcy | DRT (2024)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD (BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, AURANGABAD) ORDER SHEET

¶2

	19.03. Sr. No	2024 .12 S.A.No.241/2023
Classific ation	No. of Exh.
		SECURITISATION APPLICATION No.241/2023 Mr Chandrakant Ashok Patil .. Applicant Versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited & others .. Respondent Mr. Deshpande K B - Advocate for the applicant. None for respondents
		1. In this Securitisation Application the applicant has moved Interlocutory Application for amendment. It is argued that the Ld. District Magistrate failed to note that the Demand notice was issued only for an amount of Rs. 58,70,821/- as on 31.08.2021 whereas the outstanding amount has been shown as Rs.83,95,202.30 in the possession notice dated 29.02.2023. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the Ld. District Magistrate has failed to consider about the claim of the bank as on the date of the filing of the application. 3. On one end, the counsel is disputing the claim of Rs.83,95,202.30 which include the interest also from the date of issuance of the notice or from the date of NPA. 4. There is nothing in this amendment application and in view of the above, I pass the following order : ORDER A. Interlocutory Application no.512/2024 for amendment is dismissed and accordingly the Securitisation Application No.241/2023 is disposed of.
		B. The applicant is at liberty to challenge any further action of the bank by filing the fresh Securitisation Application.
		C. All pending IA in the proceeding, if any are disposed of accordingly. D. Consign the file to the Record Room and orders be uploaded on official web-site.
		(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶3

[APK]

Mr Chandrakant Ashok Patil v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Chandrakant Ashok Patil v. Kotak Mahindra 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

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited versus Shital Pramod Shinde

Dattakrupa Fertilizers versus State Bank of India

Pralhad Rambhau Shitole versus Osmanabad Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd.

Nayan Motors versus Dwarkadas Manrti Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd.

Babita Puranchandra Das versus State Bank of India

Pratiba Rangnath Nannore versus State Bank of India