Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
Hemant Kumar Bhatt vs HDFC BANK on 20 June 2024
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT AHMEDABAD**
**(Laxman Madnani, Presiding Officer)**
**M.A.No. 18 of 2024**
**Date of Filing : 19.03.2024**
**Date of Decision : 20.06.2024**
**HEMANTKUMAR BHATT & ORS.**
** .....APPLICANTS**
**VERSUS**
**HDFC BANK LTD.,**
** .....RESPONDENT**
**Appearance:**
Mr.Tejas Patel, Ld. Proxy Counsel for Mr.S.C.Bhatt, Ld. Counsel appeared for the Applicants Mr.Vivek Sevak, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Bank.
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.
**ORDER**
1. 1. Today, this matter has come up for consideration on withdrawal affidavit Ex.R/11 filed by the Ld. Counsel for Respondent Bank.
2. 2. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Bank submitted that the Applicants have preferred S.A. No. 51 of 2024, challenging the action/measures taken by the Respondent Bank under SARFAESI Act, 2002, wherein the Applicants filed an undertaking to clear the overdue amount and to regularize the accounts. However, Applicants have failed to comply the said order passed by this Tribunal in S.A. No.51 of 2024. Thereafter, the Court Commissioner had issued notice for taking physical possession of the property in question. Accordingly, the Applicants have filed the present Misc. Application for direction and compliance of the order passed by this Tribunal in S.A. No.51/2024.
3. 3. It is submitted that during the pendency of the present application, the Applicants have approached the Respondent and regularized the subject loan accounts. In view of the above, it is submitted that no cause is survived in the present Misc. Application, as the loan account has been regularized by the Applicants, as such, the Misc. Application has become infructuous and is required to be disposed of. Hence, it is submitted that appropriate orders may be passed.
1
2M.A.No. 18 of 2024
1. 4. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicants has also submitted that no cause survives for the Applicants against the Respondent Bank and he has no objections, if the Misc. Application may be disposed of as per the purshis filed by the Respondent Bank.
2. 5. Considering the submissions made by the Respondent Bank that the Applicants have regularized the loan account by paying the overdue amount, no cause of action survives to continue with the proceedings of the present M.A. Therefore, in the interest of justice, I am inclined to accept the submission of the Ld. Counsel for Respondent Bank to dispose of the present M.A. having become infructuous.
3. 6. In view of the aforesaid discussion and without commenting on the merits of the case, present M.A. No.18 of 2024 stands disposed of as having become infructuous, with no order as to cost.
4. 7. File be consigned to records.
**(LAXMAN MADNANI)** **Presiding Officer,** **DRT-II, Ahmedabad**