No counsel appeared for the applicant bank in a second call listing. The Debts Recovery Tribunal dismissed the old proceeding (OA/472/2016) as the applicant was not taking interest in the matter.
The case is dismissed due to the absence of the applicant and its lack of interest in the old matter.
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.
ORDER SHEET
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, SILIGURI
TOA/78/2026 arising out of OA/472/2016
Applicant
Allahabad Bank Applicant Vs Subhas Ch. Patra & Ors Defendants
Office action with date and Date of Order with Signature dated Order signature of parties when necessary. Item No.11 Order No.07 14.08.2026
Present:
Counsel for the applicant : None.
Counsel for the defendants : None.
None appears for the either side.
List this matter for second call.
RAKESH Digitally signed by PATI RAKESH PATI TIWARI Date: 2026.08.17 18:17:39 +05'30' TIWARI
(RAKESH PATI TIWARI) Presiding Officer DRT-Siliguri
Later on:-
Counsel for the applicant : None.
Counsel for the defendants : None.
The matter is again called out for second time but no one appears for the applicant. It is an old matter of year 2016 but the applicant bank is not taking any interest in the matter and accordingly, the case is dismissed .
Let the file be consigned to the Record Room.
Order be uploaded in the website of the Tribunal.
RAKESH Digitally signed by RAKESH PATI PATI TIWARI Date: 2026.08.17 TIWARI 18:17:52 +05'30'
(RAKESH PATI TIWARI) Presiding Officer DRT-Siliguri
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an old debt recovery proceeding should be dismissed in the absence of the applicant bank.
Allahabad Bank
Rakesh Pati Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
