A Debts Recovery Tribunal disposed of a Section 5A application as infructuous because the respondent bank withdrew the recovery proceedings initiated under Section 13(2) due to a technical error.
The instant SA and pending IAs disposed of as infructuous; interim order, if any, vacated; file consigned to record room.
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.
tll
Debts Recovery Tribunal-III, Kolkata Order Sheet (Continuation)
Sanjy RaY & Anr.
Vs
case No.sA/49al23
UCO Eank & Anr.
| Date of order |
Orderwithsignature | Officeaction dateal signatureof |
|---|---|---|
| OrderNo.12 14.11.2024 |
Present: ForApplicant:Ld,CounselMr.K.Das ForRespondent:Ld,Counsel1,1s.F.Yasmin TodayisfixedforhearingofSA/49A123. Heard Ld.counselfor bothsides. considered. Ld. Counselappearingfortherespondent bank submitsthatshe hastakeninstructionfromthebankthatRespondentbankhas withdrawnthe13(2)noticedated05/05/2018duetosome formalandtechnicalerrorandBankisnotproceedingany furtheronthebasisofsuch13(2)notice. Undersuch circumstances,ifthere is no 13(2)notice,there isno causeofactionforenforcingtheSARFAESIactionbythe Respondent bankfails. Hence,itisordered, TheinstantSAbeing5A/498/2023alongwithpendingIAsifany aredisposedof beinginfructuousas13(2)notice hasbeen withdrawnbytheBank. Interimorder, ifanY,isvacated File beconsignedtorecord room. Presiding |
Sanjay Ray & Anr.
UCO Bank & Anr.
H.L. Hazarika
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
