Disposed
M S Electra Electricals v. State Bank of India
DRTSA/871/2023
What the court decided
AI extract
Outcome
Costs for SA No. 871 of 2023 not charged upon the applicant.
A compact analysis
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.
¶1
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW
¶2
| r proceeding |
Officeaction taken with date |
|
|---|---|---|
| S.A. No.871/2023 04.11.2025 SL.No.31 |
ShriMohitChawla Ld. Counsel forthe applicantispresent. Ld. Counselfortherespondentbankis present. Ld.Counselfor therespondent bank had drawn my attention towards the order dated 06.01.2025 wherein it hasbeen observed that previous SARFAESI action including demand notice which wasunder challenge{ have been withdrawan bythe respondent bank and a fresh demandnotice has been issued. Ld. Counsel for the applicant Shri MohitChawla submits that cost incurredfor the SA No.871 of 2023 may not becharged upon theapplicant. The prayeris allowed. Since, the respondent bank is withdrawing the SA for its own faultthe charge incurred for prosecuting SANo,871 of 2023 will not be charged uponthe applicant. Accordingly, the SA is disposedoff. Let the file be consigned torecord room. Order be uploaded on the Tribunal’s website. (Dictated) r (PravasKumarSngh) PresidingOfficer {Mugish) |
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- applicant
Applicant
- respondent
Respondent Bank
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court