In short order, the Debt Recovery Tribunal in Chandigarh disposed of SA/167/2025 after respondent bank counsel stated the institution decided to withdraw the notice under the cited section.
Writ Application disposed of due to withdrawal of notice by the bank.
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/167/2025 PAWNA DEVI Vs STATE BANK OF INDIA
25.06.2025 Item No.6
Present: Mr. Vishisht, Counsel for the Applicant.
Mr. Vivek Verma, Counsel for respondent bank.
Mr. Verma, has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent bank and has also made a statement at the Bar that bank has taken a decision to withdraw the notice under Section
13(2). In view of this, SA stands disposed of.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Chandigarh
PANKAJ
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pawna Devi
State Bank of India
A S Narang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
