Ms S K Traders v. Uco Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
Application for discharge dismissed in default as applicants failed to appear on the date of hearing after counsel's prior request was allowed by the Tribunal.
What the court decided
Debts Recovely Tribunal-Il, Delhi
sAl72l2022 MS S K TRADERS Vs UCO BANK
27.08.2025
Item no. 21
Present: Shri Amrendra Singh, counsel for applicant. Shri Rajesh Rattan, counsel for iesponO"nt bank.
Matter is taken through Video Conferen cingl Hybrid Mode.
The Ld. counsel for the applicant has submitted that he has not contacted with the applicants and requested for discharge from the present matter. Request is altowed.
The Ld. counsel for the respondent bank has submitted that vide order dated 2z.og.zo23, interim prayer of the applicant has already been rejected by this Tribunal and subject propefi has been sord by the bank. It is submitted that surplus amount has been paid to the s. applicants.
Despite repeated calls, today, none appeared on behalf of the applicants. 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.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
MS S K TRADERS
- respondent
UCO BANK
Coram
Suhash Kumar Rai Rastogi
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court