Applicant challenged possession and demand notices. Respondent withdrew notices and initiated fresh proceedings. Arbitration petition dismissed as infructuous.
S.A. dismissed as infructuous; no costs.
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.
THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I AT HYDERABAD DATED THrS THE 17th DAY OF, MAY ,20.24 PRESENT: SRI. GUMMADI GoPIcHAND HON'BLE PRESIDING OFFICER
sA. NO. 263 0F 2022
Between
Smt. Shahnaaz Zaidi, R/o.448, Archglen Way, San Jose, C-95111, USA, presenfly R/ o.9- l-44, Larger House, Hyderabad. And others.
....Applicant/s
And
State Bank of India, SARB-II (20945), H. No. 1 -8-563/1, 1't Floor, Opp: Sandhya Theatre, RTC X Roads, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad-020. And another.
... Respondent/s
1l^?63!2^2is filed by the Applicants challenging thepossession Notice dt'07'to'2022 and arso the demand notice ai.rs.oi,.2022 issuJ Lv in" r', Respondent Bank against the schedule property-
After receiving notice in the SA, the 1't Respondent Bank appeared through their counser and fired a memo dt.03.07.2d23 ituting that the postar covers of the demand notice are mispraced ana *rey are not abre to trace them so, in.9.aan-k proposed to withdraw the deminJ notice dt.L5.07.2022 and initiate fresh proceedings and so, sA may be infructuous and [abre to be d ism issed .
As the SA challenging the demand notice and possessionis fi pondent Bank contending that there are infirmi ti :sent, there is no need to decide the valid ity or ces as the 1't Respondent Bank is withdrawi already initiated by the Bank in i taa 'nitf*[f'r'%fi r.-{r'1 .' -r a.-) ,r r..,L ',- ,rtll'r- ar +,J (., =' roE-"$U-""qS; dr'r,iirV"
respect of the schedule property. The 1't Respondent Bank is withdrawing the demand notice itself with a liberty to initiate steps afresh. So nothing survives in the SA to adjudicate and hence the SA is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, SA 263/22 is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
sd/_
Presiding Officer
ffi5
,*
F('ii EJ
'i- ,, *o-$
;i., ,n,"4:**,y
.s''i{,[ilig
Smt. Shahnaaz Zaidi
State Bank of India
Gummadigopichand
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
