The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed the applicant's application as withdrawn after the respondent bank agreed to withdraw the Section 13(2) notice while reserving rights to issue fresh notices.
The application was dismissed as withdrawn.
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/94/2023 JINDU @ MOHAMMUD SADIQ Vs
THE BAGHAT URBAN CO OPERATIVE BANK LTD
18.03.2024 Item No.101
Present: Sh. Rajnish Chauhan, Counsel for the Applicant. Sh.Yogesh Jain, Counsel for respondent bank alongwith Sh.Ajay Thakur, AO.
Mr.Jain, counsel for the respondent bank states that the bank has decided to withdraw the notice under Section 13(2). However, it reserves the rights to issue fresh notice. In view of the statement made by counsel for the respondent bank, Mr.Chauhan states that he does not want to pursue the present SA. Accordingly, the application is hereby dismissed as withdrawn . Counsel for the applicant states that applicant would approach the bank for OTS.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Chandigarh
MANOJ
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jindu @ Mohammad Sadiq
The Baghat Urban Co Operative Bank Ltd
A S Narang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
