Pooja v. Icici Bank Limited
Case brief
What is this about?
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Delhi allowed an application for transfer of jurisdiction to DRT, Chandigarh, ordering registry to return the Single Appeal to the applicant with court fees due to jurisdictional error.
What did the court decide?
Directed registry to return the SA to the applicant alongwith the Court Fees.
What the court decided
Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi
sAl24812026
POOJA Vs ICICI BANK LIMITED
27.07.2026
Item no. 5
Present:
Mr. Omkar Chauhan, counsel for applicant. Mr. Rakesh Singh, counsel for respondent bank.
Matter is taken through Video Conferencingl hybrid Mode.
The Ld. Counsel for applicant has submitted that inadvertently the present case has been filed before this Tribunal and the matter falls within thejurisdiction of DRT-II, Chandigarh. The Ld. Counsel for applicant has requested to returned the SA to the applicant alongwith the Couft Fees. Request is allowed.
The Registry is directed to returned the SA to the applicant alongwith the Court Fees.
File be consigned to record room.
fI'. (SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-II, Delhi
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Delhi has jurisdiction over the matter or should it be transferred to DRT Chandigarh?
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Pooja
- respondent
ICICI Bank Limited
Coram
SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court