Laxminarayan v. Uco Bank
Case brief
What is this about?
In the absence of the applicant, the Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed the Securitization Application and disposed of interim applications due to non-prosecution after the respondent reported completion of SARFAESI proceedings.
What did the court decide?
The Securitization Application and all interim applications were dismissed in default on account of non-prosecution.
What the court decided
Court of the Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
Item No. 45
Case No. SA/397/2025
LAXMINARAYAN Vs UCO BANK
Date: 25.08.2026.
Proceedings through hybrid mode Present:
None for the Applicant
Smt. Santosh Sharma, Counsel for the Respondent Bank/FI
In this matter, according to the counsel for the respondent bank entire actions under the SARFAESI has been completed including handing over the possession of the property to the auction purchaser.
Today, none appeared on behalf of the applicant. Therefore, this Securitization Application stands dismissed in default on account of non-prosecution. All the interim applications also stands disposed of.
File be consigned to record, as per rules. Copy of order be uploaded on website.
(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
Parties & counsel
- applicant
LAXMINARAYAN
- respondent
UCO BANK
Coram
Vimal Gupta
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court