Dismissed
Sushma Saxena v. Malviya Urban Co. Op Bank Limited
DRTSA/45/2024
What the court decided
AI extract
Outcome
Dismissed
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. 22
Case No. SA/45/2024
SUSHMA SAXENA Vs MALVIYA URBAN CO OP BANK
LIMITED
Date: 15.01.2025.
Present:
Shri Lokesh Sharma, Counsel for the Applicant
Shri Anurag Kalwatiya, Counsel for the Respondent Bank/FI In this matter, counsel for the respondent bank submits that the applicant no. 1 has lodged an FIR that she has not filed any such proceedings before this Tribunal, but counsel who appears today submits that he is not representing the applicant no. 1 and earlier counsel has filed this S.A on behalf of other. He further submits that none of his client signed this proceeding and only signed Vakalatnama. Therefore, Securitization Applicant itself is non-est in the eyes of law, as not being signed by any of the applicants.
In view of the above submissions, this Securitization Application stands dismissed.
File be consigned to record, as per rules. Copy of order be uploaded on website.
(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
Sushma Saxena
Malviya Urban Co Op Bank Limited
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court