Allowed

Mahesh Balasaheb Toradmal v. Khush Housing Finance Private Limited

DRT19 Mar 2024SA/288/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad allowed a securitisation application ex-parte due to the respondent's failure to appear, holding claims uncontroverted. The Tribunal subsequently set aside a possession notice and an order by the District Collector.

What did the court decide?

Securitisation Application allowed; possession notice and substantial order dated 24.03.2021 under Section 14 set aside.

Mahesh Balasaheb Toradmal versus Khush Housing Finance… — Execution and Attachment | DRT (2024)

¶1

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

¶2

	19.03. Sr. No	2024 .19 S.A.No.288/2022
Classific ation	No. of Exh.
		SECURITISATION APPLICATION No.288/2022 Mahesh Balasaheb Toradmal .. Applicant Versus Khush Housing Finance Private Limited & others .. Respondent
		Mr. Karpe Rahul R - Advocate for the applicant. None for respondents 1. In this matter, the applicant has filed service affidavit and submits that the summons has been served on the respondent company on 14.09.2023. 2. Despite service of summons, the respondent company did not choose to enter appearance either personally or through their Advocate. 3. In these circumstances, it appears that the respondents are not interested in filing the written statement or has nothing to show cause and as such the respondent are hereby set ex-parte.
		4. The claim of the applicant goes uncontroverted and unrebutted. 5. In view of the above, I pass the following order : ORDER
		A. Securitisation Application No.288/2022 is allowed as prayed.

¶3

[APK] (SA No.288/2022) Page 1 of 2

¶4

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AURANGABAD

¶5

(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT AT AURANGABAD)

¶6

ORDER SHEET

¶7

B. The possession notice issued on 20.12.2019 referring Section 13 (2) of the Act of 2002 and consequential impugned order dated 24.03.2021 issued by District Collector, Ahmednagar under Section 14 of the Act of 2002 and notice dated 21.06.2022 issued by the Circle Officer, Mahi is hereby set aside.

¶8

C. The Registrar to send the copy of judgment to the applicant and respondents.

¶9

D. Consign the file to the Record Room and orders be uploaded on official web-site. (Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶10

[APK] (SA No.288/2022) Page 2 of 2

Mahesh Balasaheb Toradmal v. Khush Housing Finance Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Balasaheb Toradmal v. Khush Housing Finance Private 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