The Debts Recovery Tribunal disposed of the application after the respondent FI withdrew the notice under Section 13(4), rendering the proceeding infructuous due to lack of prosecution.
The application was disposed of as it was rendered infructuous upon withdrawal of Section 13(4) notice.
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/156/2025 HARJOT SINGH AND ANOTHER Vs TATA CAPITAL HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED
06.11.2025 Item No.24
Present: Mr. Atul Sharma, Counsel for the Applicant. Mr.HP Singh, Counsel for respondent bank.
File taken up today as 05.11.2025 has been declared as holiday. Mr.HP Singh states that the respondent FI has withdrawn the notice under Section 13(4), dated 07.11.2024. However, counsel for the applicant insist that some documents be placed on record to this effect. I am of the considered view that the present SA has been rendered infructuous as there is no notice under Section 13(4). Accordingly, the SA stands disposed of .
File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Chandigarh
MANOJ
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Harjot Singh and Another
Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited
A S Narang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
