The DRT-II, Delhi dismissed the application in default for non-prosecution as the applicant failed to appear after notice and the respondent claimed the matter was settled.
Application dismissed in default for non-prosecution.
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-Il, Delhi
sA/3O2 I 2024
MR. PRITHVIDUTTA SHARMA AND ORS Vs M/S CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LTD
29.04.2025
Item no. 35
Present: None for applicant.
Ms. Sonia Singh, counsel for respondent FI.
Matter is taken through Video Conferencingl hybrid Mode.
The Ld. counsel for respondent FI has appeared today before this Tribunal and submitted that the matter has already been settled.
Despite issuance of default notice, no one appeared on behalf of the applicant. It appears that the applicants are not interested in pursuing the case. Hence, the present SA is dismissed in default for non-prosecution.
File be consigned to records.
----_ -'\ gA ..
(SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-II, Delhi
A
MR. PRITHVIDUTTA SHARMA AND ORS
M/S CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LTD
SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
