Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
M S VRS HOSPITALITY vs STATE BANK OF INDIA on 14 January 2026
1M.A. No.145 of 2023IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, AT LUCKNOW
-----
Present: Pravas Kumar Singh, Presiding Officer Miscellaneous Application No.145 of 2023
Dated 14.01.2026
1. 1. M/s VRS Hospitality near Khannout ----- Applicant Bridge Lodhipur, Districtt, Shahjahapur (U.P) 242001 through its Sole Proprietor Smt. Vanadana Gupta.
2. 2. Smt. Vandana Gupta W/o Sri Sunil
Kumar Gupta, R/o 2 Civil Lines, Behind
Durga Hotel, District Shahjahapur (U.P)
242001.
Versus
1. 1. State Bank of India a body corporate ----- Respondent constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955 having its corporate centre at Madame Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400021, Maharashtra and having one of its office at State Bank of India, Stressed Asset Recovery Branch, 2<sup>nd</sup> Floor, Capital House, 2 Tilak Marg Hazratganj, Lucknow – 226001 Through its Chief Manager Sri Anupam Saxena.
Ld. Counsel for the applicant: Mr. Abhishek Bhatnagar, Advocate Ld. Counsel for the respondent: Mr. Vinay Shankar, Advocate
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.
**JUDGMENT**
1. 1. This Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the applicant for recalling setting aside order and judgment dated 10.11.2023
2M.A. No.145 of 2023
passed by this Tribunal and whereby this Tribunal has allowed the OA against the defendants.
1. 2. The main grievance of the applicant being that a fair hearing was not made by this Tribunal.
2. 3. I find that the matter has been dealt in detail in para 8 of the said judgment. It has been observed that vide order dated 09.10.2023 the case was reserved for pronouncement of judgment and the parties were given liberty to file written objection. In the meantime, Shri Abhishek Bhatnagar Ld. Counsel for the applicant has filed a recall application and this Tribunal observed that opportunity for filing written objection has already been closed vide order dated 06.09.2023.
3. 4. It was further observed that in terms of Order 9 Rule 7 the hearing of the suit was completed on 06.09.2023 and it was adjourned for pronouncement of judgment; hence, the provision under Order 9 Rule 7 shall not have application. This Tribunal had further relied upon various judgment that recall application dated 02.11.2023 was *non-est* and it was dismissed.
4. 5. I find that this Miscellaneous Application has been brought on the same facts and any new ground has not been raised. Any new fact has not been pleaded by the applicant for submitting that any prejudice has been caused to his rights by the said judgment.
5. 6. The counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent bank; it is submitted that the MA is not maintainable.
6. 7. In view of the rival submissions. I find that any ground for setting aside or recalling of the order dated 10.11.2023 has not been made out by the applicant since the points raised has been dealt in the judgment. Accordingly, the Miscellaneous Application is **dismissed**.
File be consigned to record room.
3
M.A. No.145 of 2023
[Pravas Kumar Singh] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow.
Judgment signed, sealed, dated and pronounced in the open court on this 14<sup>th</sup> Day of January, 2026.
[Pravas Kumar Singh] Presiding Officer Debts Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow.
(Mugish)