Disposed

Skyland Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

DRT25 Mar 2026SA/327/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an application for withdrawal of a set aside order following an amicable settlement between the applicant, respondent bank, and auction purchaser, with a demand draft received by the applicant's authorized representative.

What did the court decide?

Allowed withdrawal of Set Aside Application No.32712023 and dismissed the application as withdrawn.

Skyland Builders Pvt. Ltd. versus Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited — Banking and Recovery | DRT (2026)

¶1

Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il, Delhi

¶2

s,.l327l2O23

¶3

SI(YLAND BUILDERS PVT LTD Vs KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED

¶4

25.03.2026

¶5

Item no.07

¶6

Present: Mr. Pallav Saxena, Counsel for applicant alongwith Mr. Lalit Madhan, Director of applicant Ms. Usha Singh, Counsel for respondent bank Ms. Nidhi Mohan Parashar, Counsel for auction purchaser alongwith Mr. Gaurav Rajoria, authorized representative of auction purchaser in person Mr. Shlvam Gandhi, Counsel for respondent no.5 alongwith Mr. Prateek Madhan, respondent no.5 in person

¶7

Matter is taken through Video Conferencing/Hybrid mode.

¶8

tA|73212026

¶9

The Ld. Counsel for applicant has filed IA no. 73212026 for seeking urgent listing and early hearing of I.A. (Daaty) No. 7021 2026 seeking withdrawal of S.A. No. 32712023 in view of Amicable Settlement between the parties, with Affidavit. Since the matter is taken up today, therefore, present application for early hearing stands disposed of.

¶10

tA/,702t2026

¶11

<l,

¶12

IA no.702l2026 has been filed by the applicant for withdrawal of the present SA.

¶13

The Ld. Counsel for the applicant has submitted that during pendenry of the present SA a settlement has been arrived between the applicant, the respondent bank and the auction purchaser and in pursuance of the settlement a demand draft of Rs.1,18,50,000/- will be handed over to the respondent no.5 by the auction purchaser. It is submitted that on receipt of the demand draft the applicant submits that the SAfmay be disposed of in terms of the settlement. The Ld. Counset for the rbspondent bank and the Ld. Counsel for the auction purchaser has also submitted that the settlement has been arrived as submitted by the Ld. Counsel for applicgnl and the auction purchaser will €"<sup>t

¶14

handover a demand draft of Rs. 1,18,50,000/-^{to the respondent} no.5 who has been authorized by the applicant to^receivethe demand draft. The Ld. Counsel for auction^purchaserhas handed over the demand draft no.211166^{dated25.03.2026for} a sum of Rs.1,18,50,000/- to the^{respondentno.5 who is} authorized by the applicant.

¶15

In view of the above submission^{made by the Ld. Counsel} for all the pafties and delivery of the demand draft^of Rs.1,18,50,000/- to the respondent^{no.5 on behalf of applicant,} 1A170212026 is hereby allowed and^{SA/32712023is dismissedas} withdrawn.

¶16

The Ld. Counsel for^{respondent bank is directedto release} the chain of title deeds deposited^{with the bank including} originals to the auction^{purchaser within a period of working07} days.

¶17

The date already fixed on 21.05.2026^{beforethis Tribunal stand} cancelled.

¶18

File be consigned to record^room.

¶19

a, (susHrL KuMnn RAsroGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶20

Skyland Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Skyland Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases