In a miscellaneous application seeking restoration of a dismissed securitization appeal, the court held that the explained cause of delay (father's ill-health) was insufficient. The application was dismissed as non-limited.
The application for restoration of the securitization application was dismissed due to delay.
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. 10
Case No. MA/173/2026 IN SA/277/2025
VIRENDRA SHARMA Vs ICICI BANK LIMITED
Date: 05.08.2026.
Proceedings through hybrid mode Present:
Shri Rahul Kumar Sharma, Counsel for the Applicant
Shri Vineet Sharma, Counsel for the Respondent Bank/FI
In this matter, the proceedings were dismissed in the year 2025 and application for restoration is moved today which is not within the limitation. It is submitted that the father of the applicant was not well, this is not the ground. No delay has been explained. Therefore, Securitization Application cannot be restored.
The applicant is at liberty to challenge the further actions of the respondent bank.
In view of the above, this Misc. 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
VIRENDRA SHARMA
ICICI BANK LIMITED
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
