Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
UNION BANK OF INDIA vs Gurmit Singh and Ors on 17 May 2021
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
MA 42/2018 In OA No.3029/2017 UNION BANK OF INDIA VS. GURMIT SINGH & ORS.
17.05.2021 Item No.95
Present: Adv. Yogesh Jain, Counsel for the Applicant. Adv. Abhineej Taneja, Counsel for the non-applicant (Bank).
(Matter heard through VC) This MA is filed by the applicants, praying to set aside ex parte order dated 17.01.2018 passed by my Ld. Predecessor in OA No.3029/2017. Present applicants are defendant No.1 and 2 in OA No.3029/2017, which was filed by the non-applicant bank for recovery of an amount of Rs.1,28,09,373/- and all four defendants, including present applicants were declared ex parte vide order dated 16.01.2018, passed by my Ld. Predecessor. Ld. Counsel for the MA applicant argued that affidavit filed by the officer of bank is defective, designation of the officer is not mentioned, relationship of the applicant No.1 with Smt. Gurinder Kaur is wrongly mentioned and date of affixation of notice/summon is not mentioned in the photograph. On the other hand, this ground was strongly opposed by Ld. Counsel for the respondent/non-applicant bank strongly opposed on the ground that this MA is barred by limitation, rank of officer of the bank is mentioned in short form and so she prayed for dismissal of the MA. Heard arguments and perused the record. This SA was filed against the present applicants for recovery of amount of Rs.12809373/- and the applicants now taking plea by trying to pointing out defects in the affidavit whereas, now the recovery proceedings are in progress and next date is fixed before Recovery Officer on 27.05.2021. Grounds taken by present applicant are nothing but based on after thought story, and now applicants wants to stop the recovery proceedings of outstanding amount. It is also important to mention here that the applicants has not stated anything about credit facility availed by them, DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-I, CHANDIGARH
payment made by them and dispute if any, with regard to outstanding amount. Accordingly, I am of the view that this MA is devoid of any merit, based on after thought story and so is not liable to be accepted. Accordingly, the MA stands disposed of as dismissed.
(Vivek Saxena) Presiding Officer DRT, Jaipur (Additional Charge DRT-I, Chandigarh) RJ