In a tested case before DRT-I, Chandigarh, the Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed the applicant's application in default because no one appeared on behalf of the applicant despite multiple summonses, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the matter.
Application dismissed in default due to non-appearance of the applicant.
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.
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
SA/77/2022 ROSHAN LAL Vs STATE BANK OF INDIA
03.09.2024 Item No.6
Present: None for the Applicant. Sh.KC Bhatia, Counsel for respondent bank.
Case called several times since morning but nobody is appearing on behalf of the applicant. It is already 03:00 p.m. It appears that applicant is not interested in pursuing this matter. Therefore, application filed by the applicant is dismissed in default .
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Chandigarh
MANOJ
Roshan Lal
State Bank of India
A S Narang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
