Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed a fresh application and supply of notices despite notice recall and non-receipt, directing registry not to raise limitation objections if filed within two weeks.
Registry not to raise limitation objection if subsequent SA filed within two weeks; copies of notices supplied to counsel.
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. 23
SA/630/2026
MANVI SHARMA Vs UNION BANK OF INDIA
Date: 17.07.2026
Proceedings through hybrid mode:
Present:
Ms. Shruti Goyal, Counsel for the applicant
Shri Vijay Chahar, Counsel for the Respondent
In this matter, counsel for the respondent bank submits that the notice on the basis of which the SA has been filed has already been recalled on 04.04.2026.
He further submits that they have issued fresh notice under Section 13(2), but both these notices have not been received by the applicants as stated by counsel at Bar.
Let the copy of both these notices be supplied to counsel today itself and if any further proceedings have been taken, those notices shall also be supplied. Applicant will be at liberty to challenge those proceedings.
Registry not to raise any objection on the limitation, if the subsequent SA is filed within two weeks time.
With these directions, 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
cm
1 issue framed by the court
Whether limitation objection should be entertained when subsequent arrest can be filed within two weeks?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
MANVI SHARMA
UNION BANK OF INDIA
Vimal Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
