This single-paragraph order dismisses a second appeal by the applicant in default for non-prosecution, noting that no one appeared on behalf of the applicant despite issuance of a default notice.
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-Il, Delhi
sA/16s l202s
DILIP KUMAR VERMA Vs TRUHOME FINANCE LIMITED
2t.08.2026 Item no. 19
Present None for applicant. Ms. Usha Singh, counsel for respondent FI.
Matter is taken through Video Conferencingl hybrid Mode.
The Ld. Counsel for respondent FI has appeared today before this Tribunal.
Despite issuance of default notice, no one appeared on behalf of the applicant. 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.
s" (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-II, Delhi
A
DILIP KUMAR VERMA
TRUHOME FINANCE LIMITED
SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
