The Presiding Officer of the DRT, Jaipur, dismissed an application filed by the applicant as an unpaid seller. The court held that since the sale deed was duly executed and registered, the seller cannot exercise the right here under the DRT Act.
The Securitization Application is dismissed.
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. 35
Case No. SA/462/2025
JITENDRA KUMAR SONI Vs CHOLAMANDLAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY
Date: 04.02.2026.
Proceedings through hybrid mode
Present:
Shri Prem Prakash Bunkar, Counsel for the Applicant
Shri Jitendra Choudhary, Counsel for the Respondent Bank/FI
In this matter, this Securitization Application has been filed on the basis of being an unpaid seller. Unpaid seller cannot be exercise its right here. The sale deed was duly executed and registered, therefore, he is to claim his balance money from the purchaser of the property.
In view of the above, this Securitization Application stands dismissed.
File be consigned to record, as per rules. Copy of order be uploaded on website.
(Vimal Gupta) Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jaipur
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an unpaid seller who has executed and registered a sale deed can exercise rights under the Securitization Application.
Jitendra Kumar Soni
Cholamandlam Investment and Finance Company
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
