Dismissed

Mrs Pratibha Pundalik Patil v. Central Bank of India

DRT23 Jan 2024SA/373/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Tribunal disposed of an interim application seeking a stay on a government notice and subsequently disposed of the main Securitisation Application. The court directed the applicants to hand over possession of the suit property to the defendant bank as an agent and settle the loan account by a specified date before full disposal.

What did the court decide?

Applicants directed to hand over property possession to defendant bank as agent and settle loan account by March 25, 2024. Main Securitisation Application disposed of.

Mrs Pratibha Pundalik Patil versus Central Bank of… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2024)

¶1

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

¶2

THROUGH VIDEO-CONFERENCE

¶3

Sr.No.01

¶4

ORDER BELOW IA No.122/2024 IN

¶5

SECURITISATION APPLICATION No.373/2023

¶6

( Delivered on 23^rd January, 2024 )

¶7

Mrs. Pratibha Pundalik Patil & Ors. ..Applicants Versus Central Bank of India ..Defendant

¶8

Mr. Tushar Daware h/f Mr. Pramod S. Gaikwad – Advocate for the applicants

¶9

Mrs. Sudha Koloti – Advocate for defendant bank

¶10

By the present application, the applicants have claimed relief to stay the effect, execution and implementation of the Notice dated 1^st January, 2024 issued by Tahsildar/Executive Magistrate Jalgaon in respect of the suit property.

¶11

The learned Advocate appearing for defendant bank orally contested the application.

¶12

Heard both the parties.

¶13

The learned Advocate appearing for the applicants submitted that the applicants are ready to settle the loan account and are also ready to deposit Rupees One Lakh today. Therefore, relief as claimed may be granted.

¶14

Per contra, the learned Advocate appearing for defendant bank submitted that today’s dues are more than Rupees Thirty-Eight Lakhs and applicants have not pointed out any of the illegalities in measures taken by defendant bank. Therefore, application may be rejected.

¶15

In view of submissions of both the parties and since applicants are ready to settle the loan account, I am of opinion that if direction is given to the applicants to possess the suit property as an Agent of defendant bank till settlement of loan account, no prejudice would be caused to either of the parties.

¶16

Hence, I pass the following order:

¶17

ORDER

¶18

A. The applicants shall handover possession of the suit property to the defendant bank by 3.00 P.M. today and the defendant bank shall lodge the applicants as it’s Agent in the suit properties till 25^th March, 2024.

¶19

B. The applicants shall settle the loan account in full and final by 25^th March, 2024. In default, the applicants shall handover vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property to the defendant bank immediately.

¶20

C. In the meantime, the applicants shall not create third party interest in the suit property.

¶21

D. This application is disposed of.

¶22

Pronounced in open Court.

¶23

Sd/(Dilip G. Murumkar) Place : Pune I/c Presiding Officer Date: 23.01.2024 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶24

(KAUR)

¶25

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

¶26

THROUGH VIDEO-CONFERENCE

¶27

Sr.No.01

¶28

ORDER BELOW EXHIBIT-1

¶29

¶30

SECURITISATION APPLICATION No.373/2023

¶31

( Delivered on 23^rd January, 2024 )

¶32

Mrs. Pratibha Pundalik Patil & Ors. ..Applicants Versus

¶33

Central Bank of India ..Defendant

¶34

Mr. Tushar Daware h/f Mr. Pramod S. Gaikwad – Advocate for the applicants

¶35

Mrs. Sudha Koloti – Advocate for defendant bank

¶36

Heard both the parties.

¶37

In view of Order passed below IA No.122/2024, the cause of action does not survive. Hence, this application is disposed of.

¶38

Hence, I pass the following order:

¶39

ORDER

¶40

A. Securitisation Application No.373/2023 stands disposed of.

¶41

B. All pending Interlocutory Applications also stand disposed of.

¶42

Pronounced in open Court.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

(Dilip G. Murumkar) Place : Pune I/c Presiding Officer Date: 23.01.2024 Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad

¶45

(KAUR)

¶46

DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, PUNE (BEFORE HON’BLE IN-CHARGE PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT, AURANGABAD)

¶47

ROZNAMA

¶48

SA No.373/2023

¶49

Date on which the Application comes before the Tribunal for any proceedings	Classif ication of docum ent	No.of exhib it	Appli Vs. Defen	cant/s – Mrs. Pratibha Pundalik Patil & Ors. dant/s – Central Bank of India	Date on which appeal or application is adjourned
1	2	3		4	5
23.01.2024
			Mr. Gaik Mrs. bank	Tushar Daware h/f Mr. Pramod S. wad – Advocate for the applicants Sudha Koloti – Advocate for defendant
			The Conf 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.	matter is taken up through Video erence. The learned Advocate for the applicants has filed IA No.122/2024 and IA No.123/2024 supported by affidavit which is taken on record. Heard learned Advocate for the parties. IA No.122/2024 is disposed of by order. SA No.373/2023 is disposed by Order passed below Exhibit-1. Proceeding be closed.
				Sd/- I/c PO

¶50

(KAUR)

Mrs Pratibha Pundalik Patil v. Central Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs Pratibha Pundalik Patil v. Central Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

State Bank of India versus Suresh Banechand Runwal

Avinah Shivajirao Bhangire versus Aspire Home Finance Corporation Limited

Maharashtra Gramin Bank versus Late Seva Varju Rathod (Deceased)

Shaikh Jakiya Sultana Mohammad Sharif Deceased versus Shri Chhatrapati Rajashri Shahu Urban Cooperative Bank Limited

Champalal Bherulal Jain Prop Zankar Palace versus The Malkapur Urban Co-Op Bank Ltd.

Vaidyanath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Limited versus Union Bank of India