Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Delhi dismissed Special Appeal no. 32/2023 filed by Sunil Kalra against Cholamandalam Investment in default for non-prosecution as the applicant failed to appear on multiple dates.
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 Recovety Tribunal-Il, Delhi
sA/30812023 SUNIL KALRA VS CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT
30.01 .2025
Item no. 32
Present: None for applicant. Shri Vivek Singh, counsel for respondent FI.
Matter is taken through Video Conferencingl Hybrid Mode.
On perusal of the file it is obserued that none appeared on behalf of applicant on 27.03.2024 and 06.09.2024. Today also none appeared on behalf of the applicant. It appears that the applicant is not interested in pursuing the case. Hence, the present SA is dismissed in default for non-prosecution.
File be consigned to records.
....q ,-) ,d\ / (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi
P
t
SUNIL KALRA
CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT
SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
