Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
Govind Malwad vs STATE BANK OF INDIA on 25 October 2021
ORDER SHEET
[APK] (MA No.7/2021) Page 1 of 3
25.10.2021
Sr. No.49 MA No.7/2021
Classific
ation
No. of
Exh.
MISC. APPLICATION No.07/2021
Mr. G.V. Malwad & another
..Applicants
Versus
State Bank of India & another
..Non-applicants
None for the applicants
Mr. R.C.Patil – Advocate for the non-applicant no.1 bank None for others Due to Covid 19 situation the matter is taken through Video Conference.
1. The learned counsel for the non-applicant bank submits that
the applicants have made various other persons as party including the previous officers of the non-applicant bank and the Tribunal whereas the Applicants were only defendants.
2. The learned counsel for the non-applicant bank further submits that the applicants have filed the present MA as against the original applicant in the Original Application no.153/2013 and have added various other persons as party and it is nothing but an effort to malign the image of other persons and unsustainable reliefs have been sought, which cannot be granted in any manner.
3. The Original Application no.153/2013 is disposed by passing judgement dated 07th November, 2014 by my
ORDER SHEET
[APK] (MA No.7/2021) Page 2 of 3
predecessor and Recovery Certificate no.81/2014 has already been issued. It appears that the applicants are trying to delay the recovery of the non-applicant bank by making unnecessary allegations. The learned counsel for the non- applicant bank further submits that taking of the loan and non-repayment of the loan are not denied by the applicants but the Applicants have no intention to pay the dues of Bank.
the Recovery Certificate has already been issued in favour of the non-applicant bank and the bank has to pursue its remedy under the Recovery Certificate.
5. The learned counsel for the non-applicant bank submits that
the pleading in the MA are unsustainable. The tone and tanner of the pleading is also uncalled for and heavy cost should be imposed.
6. The learned counsel for the non-applicant submits that the only remedy available to the applicants was to file an appeal against that order. Even this Misc. Application is not within limitation and has been filed only at that time when the bank tried to move under recovery. He further submits that the Bank is moving appropriate application before recovery officer for taking possession of mortgage properties.
7. I heard the arguments advanced by Mr. R.C.Patil counsel for the non-applicant bank and perused all the documents produced on record and the reply filed by the learned counsel for the non-applicant bank.
ORDER SHEET
[APK] (MA No.7/2021) Page 3 of 3
8. The counsel for bank request to waive the cost and is waived in view of unsustainable pleadings just to malign the officers of Bank.
9. On the last date of hearing i.e. on 29th September, 2021
none appears for the applicants. Today also none appears on behalf of the applicants.
10. In view of the above, I pass the following order through Video Conference:
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
A. Misc. Application No.07/2021 is dismissed for non- prosecution and also being devoid of merits. B. All pending Interlocutory Application in the proceeding, if any are disposed of accordingly. C. Copy of the order be sent to the applicants and the original respondents in the SA and OA. D. Consign the file to the record room.
(Vimal Gupta)
Presiding Officer
Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad