A petitioner requested withdrawal of Vakalanama due to a misunderstanding regarding document possession. The Tribunal permitted the withdrawal and dismissed the Securitization Application.
Withdrawal of Vakalanama permitted. Securitization Application dismissed.
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.
Court of the Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
Item No. 20
Case No.SA/14/2022
MR BRIJMOHAN Vs SRG HOUSING FINANCE LTD
Date: 04.08.2025.
Proceedings through hybrid mode Present:
Shri Devendra Sharma, Counsel for the Applicant
Ms. Praneeta Agarwal, Counsel for the Respondent Bank/FI
In this matter, counsel for the applicant very fairly submitted that was wrongly informed by his client that he is having the original documents. He submitted that it has been made clear that applicant does not have the original documents and advised the applicant to appear before this Tribunal, but he refused to do the same, therefore, he prayed for withdrawal of Vakalanama. Permitted.
In view of the above, this Securitization Application stands dismissed. File be consigned to record, as per rules. Copy of order be uploaded on website.
(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
MR BRIJMOHAN
SRG HOUSING FINANCE LTD
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
