Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
STATE BANK OF INDIA vs D.J. EXIM INDIA PVTG.LTD., on 26 February 2021
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI
(BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)
ORDER SHEET
Sr. No.17
Classifi
cation
No.
of
Exh.
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION No.211 of 2018
In
ORIGINAL APPLICATION
No.1832 of 2016
State Bank of India
… Applicant.
Versus
M/s. D.J. Exim & Ors.
… Defendant.
Ms Medha Behere – Advocate for the applicant.
Mr R.B. Mokashi i/b Mr Jagannath Pawar – Advocate for defendant nos.1 to 3.
Shri Deepak M. Thakkar
26th February, 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.
ORDER
1. The applicant and defendant nos.1 to 3 have amicably settled the matter and has presented the consent terms along with the affidavit (exhibit-16) explaining the reason for the settlement for the given amount.
2. The matter has been amicably settled for an amount of ₹11.81 crores as set out in clause (a). The parties confirmed having made the payment in the sum of ₹55
lakhs and the sum of ₹1.22 crores as set out in prayer clause (c). The parties confirm that the balance amount of ₹10.40 crores as agreed is to be paid by defendant nos.1 to 3 on or before 31st March 2021 and the amount of deposit to which is lying before the Learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, the defendant nos.1 to 3 has already given their no objection for withdrawal of the same. The non-payment of the balance amount would attract the penal provision is set out in Interlocutory Application of the consent terms.
3. The parties have recorded in clause (e) of the consent terms the consensus with regard to the release of the mortgaged property as set out there in.
4. The parties have understood the terms negotiated and recorded in the consent terms, so also the consequences of default.
5. The parties jointly request to dispose of the Original Application in terms of the consent terms.
6. The Original Application is disposed of as per consent terms.
Sd/- (Deepak M. Thakkar)
D.R.T.No.2, Mumbai Sagar
IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL No.2, MUMBAI (BEFORE HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) ORDER SHEET
26.02.2021 Sr. No.17 OA No.1832 of 2016 classifi- cation No. of Exh.
Ms Medha Behere – Advocate for the applicant. Mr R.B. Mokashi i/b Mr Jagannath Pawar – Advocate for defendant nos.1 to 3.
1. Order in Interlocutory Application No.211 of 2018 passed separately.
2. In view of the Interlocutory Application No.211 of 2018, Original Application No.1832 of 2016 stands disposed of with no order as to costs.
Sd/-
D.R.T.No.2, Mumbai Sagar