The Debts Recovery Tribunal disposed of a securitization application where the applicant claimed unawareness of the matter and the respondent acknowledged a default on a settlement payment following an Overtime Settlement agreement.
Securitization Application stood disposed off.
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. 77
Case No. SA/179/2024
MS GOYAL SYNTHETICS Vs AU SMALL FINANCE BANK LIMITED Date: 20.01.2025.
Present:
Shri Kapil Kumar Kumawat, Counsel for the Applicant Shri Kirti Kapoor, Counsel for the Respondent Bank/FI
In this matter, counsel for the applicant submits that he is not aware the position in the matter. Counsel for the respondent bank submits that there was a settlement with the applicant according to which Rs. 1.50 Core was to be paid on 15.12.2024 and he has defaulted. Once the borrower entered into an OTS, all the actions taken by the respondent bank rectified.
In view of the above submissions, this Securitization Application stands disposed off.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to the concerned parties. File be consigned to record, as per rules.
(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
MS Goyal Synthetics
AU Small Finance Bank Limited
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
