Disposed
Ms Royal Enterprises v. Yes Bank
DRTSA/473/2025
What the court decided
AI extract
Outcome
Disposed
A compact analysis
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.
¶1
GONTD. ORDER. SHEET -i?.T"
¶2
PAGE NO.
¶3
CASE NO.
¶4
| DATE | DESCRIPTION OFTHEORDER | REMARK |
|---|---|---|
| S.no.54 SA4 29.0t.26 5 |
ShriShivendra Pandey,Advocateforapplicant. Shri,AdvocateforRespondentFI. |
|
| TheLearned CounselfortheApplicantismovingIA statingthereintheOTSfiledbytheapplicanthas been accepted andthe S.A.has becomeinfructuous. The SA being infructuousisdisposed. |
||
| <br>(PravasKumarSingh) Presidingofficer, DRT:LUCKNOW lncharge:DRTJabatpur |
Parties & counsel
AI extract
- applicant
Shri Shivendra Pandey
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court