Appeal by a guarantor against a recovery order was dismissed as withdrawn by the Debts Recovery Tribunal after counsel stated they would contest a separate pending appeal filed by the bank.
The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.
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 RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
APPEAL/1/2025 In RC No.320/2018 MANDEEP DHAWAN THROUGH ABHISHEK SEHGAL GBPA HOLDER
Vs
RECOVERY OFFICER, DRT CHANDIGARH & ORS.
09.07.2026
Item No.148
Present: Mr. Virender Sood, Counsel for the Appellant. Mr.Gaurav Goyal and Saurav Goyal, Counsel for respondent bank/Punjab and Sind Bank. Mr.Yogesh Kumar and Mr.Sachin Shrama, Counsel for the borrowers.
Mr.Varinder Sood, counsel for the appellant has argued that the bank has also filed appeal No. 02/2025 against the order dated 04.04.2025 passed by the Recovery Officer in RC No. 320/2018 and the auction purchaser is also party in that appeal.
Mr.Sood states that he would contest that appeal and he does not want to pursue the present appeal. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn . File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Chandigarh
MANOJ
MANDEEP DHAWAN THROUGH ABHISHEK SEHGAL GBPA HOLDER
RECOVERY OFFICER, DRT CHANDIGARH
A S Narang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
