The Single Appellate Bench of the Debt Recovery Tribunal dismissed the applicant's appeal in default due to the non-appearance of the applicant despite a notice. The Tribunal noted the applicant's lack of interest in pursuing the case.
The Single Appellate Bench dismissed the appeal in default for non-prosecution.
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 Recovely Tribunal-Il, Delhi
sA/8e/2O2s
SUNITA RANI Vs SHUBHAM HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED
30.07.2026
Item no.47
Present: None for applicant.
Mr. Baljeet Singh, proxy counsel for respondent FI.
Matter is taken through Video Conferencingl hybrid Mode.
The Ld. Counsel for respondent FI has appeared today before this Tribunal.
Desplte issuance of default notice, no one appeared on behalf of the applicant. It appears that the applicants are not interested in pursuing the case. Hence, the present SA is dismissed in default for non-prosecution.
File be consigned to records.
-b-''
(SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI) PRESIDING OFFICER, DRT-II, Delhi
A
SUNITA RANI
SHUBHAM HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED
SUSHIL KUMAR RASTOGI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
