Default Order: The applicant failed to appear on the hearing date following a default notice. The Debt Recovery Tribunal dismissed the Special Application due to non-prosecution by the applicant's counsel.
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
sAl337l2O23 RIDHI SIDHI VINAYAK ENTERPRISES VS CANARABANK WADHWAN
29.01.2026
Item no.46
Present: None for applicant Ms. Seema Gupta, Counsel forrespondent bank
Matter is taken throughVideo Conferencing/Hybridmode.
None appeared on behalf ofthe applicant on 11.L2.2024.Despite issuance of default noticenone appeared today. It appears that the applicants arenot interested in pursuing the case. Hence, the present SA is dismissed in default fornon-prosecution.
File be consigned torecords.
il
(SUSHIL KUMATI RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi
c
# sAl337l2O23 RIDHI SIDHI VINAYAK ENTERPRISES
CANARA BANK WADHWAN
Sushil Kumari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
