Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
Shri Surajprakash R. Narang vs State Bank of India on 19 December 2023
**IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT AHMEDABAD**
**(Laxman Madnani, Presiding Officer)**
M.A.No.61 of 2016
Date of Filing : 12.09.2016
Date of Decision : 19.12.2023
**SHRI SURAJPRAKASH R. NARANG**
.....APPLICANT
**VERSUS**
**STATE BANK OF INDIA**
.....RESPONDENT
**Appearance:**
None present for the Applicant.
Mr.H.M.Shroff, Ld. Counsel appeared 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 hearing.
2. 2. The present Misc. Application has been preferred on 12.09.2016 for seeking condonation of delay in filing Review and recall of judgment dated 30.10.2013 passed in O.A.No.277/2012 and Recovery Certificate.
3. 3. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Bank has filed a purshis at Ex.R/08, submitting *inter alia* that the loan account pertaining to the present matter was settled by the Applicant with the Respondent Bank and accordingly, Respondent Bank has withdrawn the Recovery Proceedings No.92 of 2013, wherein the Ld. Recovery Officer has passed following order dated 23.06.2022 – *"matter has been settled between the parties and the Applicant/CH Bank has received full and final amount of Rs.14.50 Lakhs against the dues of Rs.23,91,675.00 and Applicant does not want to proceed further in this matter. In view of the above, RC/RP stands closed having been satisfied. Let the file be closed after noting in the concerned register."*
Copy of the said order dated 23.06.2022 passed in R.P.No.92 of 2013 is enclosed along with the purshis so filed at Ex.R/8.
1. 4. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Bank further submitted that the matter has been repeatedly adjourned since long and Applicant has failed to appear before this Tribunal since 04.03.2020, as such, it is submitted that appropriate orders may be passed in the interest of justice.
2. 5. Perusal of the order sheet reveals that the matter has been repeatedly adjourned since 04.03.2020 and applicant has failed to appear before this Tribunal to submit their say. Moreover, in terms of the purshis so filed by the Respondent Bank at Ex.R/8, it appears that that the borrower has paid an amount of Rs.14.50
2M.A.No. 61 of 2016
Lakhs towards full and final amount of dues and Respondent Bank has withdrawn its R.P.No.92/2013 on 23.06.2022
1. 6. Case was called several times. There is no representation on behalf of applicant. It appears that the applicant himself is not interested in pursuing his own cause; hence this Tribunal has no other alternative, but to dismiss the case for the want of prosecution.
2. 7. The Misc. Application is dismissed for the want of prosecution. Interim reliefs, if any, granted by this Tribunal, is hereby vacated.
3. 8. Misc. Application is accordingly disposed of.
4. 9. No order as to cost.
5. 10. Let the file be consigned to records.
**(LAXMAN MADNANI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, AHMEDABAD**