Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals

KAMNATH ENTERPRISE vs UNION BANK OF INDIA on 12 December 2025

Exh-8

12-12-2025

MA/78/2025

Present :

Mr. Keshav Chopra, Ld. Counsel for the Applicant.

Ms. Nimisha Kayasth, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Bank In this case, the Ld. Counsel for the Applicant has filed Purshish that in SA No: 365/2025 while disposing that SA finally vide order dated 07-07-2025, the Applicant was directed to deposit the entire outstanding dues with the Respondent Bank in phase wise manner and on that condition interim protection in favour of the Applicant was granted, while disposing that SA finally. Unfortunately, the Applicant was not in a position to comply the order in totality and after depositing Rs.67,00,000/-, under compulsion, the Applicant was in default, that is why the Respondent Bank has not only initiated proceedings for possession of the secured assets on 11-12-2025 but also put the property on auction and fixed a date for auction on 31-12-2025.

In this regard, Exh.A/7 Purshish has been filed by the Applicant informing therein that with the consent of the Respondent bank the entire outstanding amount as on today of Rs.49,20,000/- was deposited by the Applicant today itself out of which Rs.20,00,000/- through Demand Draft dated 09-12-2025 and remaining Rs.29,20,000/- through NEFT was deposited by the Applicant and payment was accepted by the Respondent bank and since the entire outstanding dues have been cleared by the Applicant, now the Respondent bank has agreed not to proceed with its SARFAESI action any more. It has been requested that recording this fact, this MA may be finally disposed of.

The Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Bank Ms. Nimisha Kayasth has put a remark as "Seen" on the Undertaking Exh.A/7 and has orally agreed upon the contentions of the Ld. Counsel of the Applicant that the SATFAESI action initiated by the Respondent Bank has now come to an end after the Bank has received the entire outstanding dues from the Applicant.

The Respondent Bank is directed to issue "No Due Certificate" in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the present MA is disposed of as being infructuous.

Let this filed be consigned to record.

**(PANKAJ KUMAR UPADHYAY)** **PRESIDING OFFICER,** **DRT-II, AHMEDABAD.**

us/Supp-1

Page 1 of 1

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead