Dismissed
Seema Navin Sureka v. Asset Care and Reconstruction Enterprise Limited
DRTSA/9/2024
What the court decided
AI extract
Outcome
Application for withdrawal allowed; Special Appeal stood disposed of as withdrawn.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.
| 08.10.2025 | Exh. | Roznama-MDRT-II S.A. No.09 of 2024 |
Next date |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15 | Mr Rafeeq Peermohideen, Advocate for the Applicants. Ms Akshata Parkar and Mr Mihir Utekar, Advocate for the Respondent No.1. None for other Respondents. During the hearing, Ld. Advocate for the Applicants has filed Application (exhibit-15) for withdrawal of the S.A. No.09 of 2024 stating that the matter has been amicably resolved with the Respondent ARC. Ld. Advocate submits that the Applicants do not want to prosecute with the matter. In view of the above submissions, Application for withdrawal of S.A. No.09 of 2024 is allowed. Consequently, S.A. No.09 of 2024 stands disposed of as withdrawn. Pending IAs, stand disposed of. File be consigned to the Record Room after due compliance. |
||
| nrb - 30 | Sd/- P.O. DRT-II |
Closed |
Applicants
Respondent No.1
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court