Sohani Devi Sharma versus Infinity Fincorp Solutions Private Limited

In this matter, Ld. Counsel for the applicant make two points submits, one is that all the proceedings have been taken against deceased person and second is that the NPA has been declared wrongly contrary the guidelines of the RBI and as per the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶10

Counsel for the respondent bank has drawn my attention to all the proceedings which were not against the deceased person and he is represented through the legal heirs who are also co-borrowers. So far as classification of the account NPA is concerned, the contention of the respondent bank is that the account has been properly classified as NPA and Notice 13(2) was issued in the year 2024 not during COVID/ moratorium and benefit of moratorium has also been given to the applicant.

¶11

In these circumstances, there is no merit in the Securitization Application and two point of the applicant are decided against him, therefore, this Securitization Application stands dismissed.

¶12

The applicant is at liberty to approach the respondent bank for settlement.

¶13

File be consigned to record, as per rules. Copy of order be uploaded on website.

¶14

¶15

Court of the Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

¶16

(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur

¶17

Sohani Devi Sharma v. Infinity Fincorp Solutions Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sohani Devi Sharma v. Infinity Fincorp Solutions Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hdfc Bank versus Ramesh Yadav

Punjab National Bank versus Satvindra Singh

Hdfc Bank versus Lichhi

Mahendra Singh Ahada versus Srg Housing Finance Ltd.

Punjab National Bank versus Juhuru

M S Kamla Trading Company versus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited