Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
SHRIKANT PRABHAKAR LINGAYAT vs MS MANAPPURAM HOME FINANCE LIMITED on 29 July 2022
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 SHEET**
**DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR**
**M.A. No. 39/2022**
**Shri Shrikant Prabhakar Lingayat & Anr Vs. M/s Manappuram Home Finance Ltd.**
**Date: 29.07.2022**
**M.A. 39/2022**
Heard learned counsel for both sides.
The learned counsel for applicants has moved this M.A. whereby he has stated that there is a delay of only 36 days in filing S.A. which may be condoned, as the order passed by the Ld. District Magistrate dated 04.05.2022 has come to his knowledge in the second week of June, 2022. This fact has been denied by the learned counsel for the respondent, who has submitted that the delay in filing S.A. has not been properly explained.
Considering the submissions made on behalf of both sides and material on record, the delay of 36 days in filing the S.A. is hereby condoned.
Registry is directed to register the S.A., if otherwise in order.
**I.A. 1290/2022**
Heard both sides on this application.
Ld. Counsel for the applicants has submitted that they have moved this application for protection of mortgaged property against the Tahasildar's notice dated 07.07.2022. He has further submitted that the applicants are ready to deposit Rs. 1 lac today and rest of the amount will be deposited as per pursis (Exh. 8). The learned counsel for the respondent has filed a pursis (Exh. 10) enclosing therewith statement of account showing therein that as on today Rs. 34,92,427.88 is overdue against the applicants who have not complied earlier OTS proposal submitted by them even after giving sufficient time.. There is nothing on record to suggest that pursis (Exh. 8) has been complied by them till today.
*Court*
NA 39/22
Cantd. 29/7/22
Considering the submissions made by both sides and material on record it cannot be said that a bonafide intention has been shown by the applicants with regard to payment of loan account. As such, I do not find any merit in the present application and therefore the same is hereby rejected List the matter on 02.09.2022 for filing reply to S.A. by the respondent before Registrar.
(Pankaj Kumar) Presiding Officer DRT, Nagpur