In this recovery proceedings, the Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed the bank to withdraw the Section 13(2) notice. The applicant's court fee became the bank's cost, and the proceedings were disposed of.
Notice under Section 13(2) withdrawn; proceedings and pending IAs disposed; court fee awarded as cost to bank.
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. 28
Case No.SA/35/2026
MS SEEMA POULTRY AND AGRICULTURE Vs UCO BANK Date: 20.03.2026.
Proceedings through hybrid mode:
Present:
None for the Applicant
Shri Vikas Meena, Counsel for the Respondent
In this matter, counsel for the bank submits that they are withdrawing the notice under Section 13(2).
Respondent are permitted to withdraw the notice under Section 13(2). Expenses related to these proceedings shall not be debited from the account of applicant and court fee which has been paid by the applicant shall be a cost on the bank which will be credited into the account of the borrower.
Accordingly, SA stands disposed of, all pending IAs also stands disposed off, if any.
File be consigned to record as per rules. Copy of order be uploaded on website.
(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
1 provisions across 1 enactments
MS SEEMA POULTRY AND AGRICULTURE
UCO BANK
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
