During personal hearing, the respondent bank stated that no SARFAESI action is pending and ensures future intimation of DM orders. The Tribunal disposed of the application based on this statement without applied provisions or cited cases.
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-I, CHANDIGARH
SA/55/2022 MANJIT KAUR Vs STATE BANK OF INDIA
15.01.2026 Item No.33
Present: Mr. Shvetanshu Goel, Counsel for Applicant (on vc). Ms.RK Grewal, Counsel for respondent bank (on vc).
Ms.Grewal states that no SARFAESI action is pending and whenever an order is passed by the DM, intimation of the same would be given to the applicant. Counsel for the applicant states that in view of the statement made by counsel for the respondent bank, the present SA be disposed of. In view of this, the present SA stands disposed of .
File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
(A S Narang) Presiding Officer DRT-I, Chandigarh
MANOJ
Manjit Kaur
State Bank of India
A S Narang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
