Debts Recovery Tribunals and Appellate Tribunals
SH SURENDRA vs CANARA BANK on 23 July 2026
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** Page No. ....
**DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, DEHRADUN** **M.A. No. 15 of 2023**
**Shri Surendra Vs. Canara Bank**
**Date: 23.07.2026**
Item No.39
Present: Applicant in person
Sh. Himanshu Anand, Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Sh. Sultan Khan, Ld. Counsel for respondent bank Called out, Ld. Counsel for the parties present. Applicant in person present.
The applicant has stated that the S.A. No. 172 of 2022 has been filed by the Applicant wherein on 13.03.2023 the Tribunal has dismissed the present S.A in non-presence of applicant.
It is stated by the Applicant that the matter was listed before the Ld. Registrar for mediation on 06.02.2023 and since the respondent bank further refused to participate in the mediation proceedings hence the matter was adjourned and was further listed before the Tribunal for 13.03.2023 wrongly noted in case diary as 17.03.2023. The Counsel for applicant on 06.02.2023 mentioned wrong date in his case diary in the present matter as 17.03.2023(( Annexure -A).
When the Counsel appeared on 23.02.2023, in shock and dismay, the counsel for applicant found the matter was not listed in the cause list of the Tribunal on 17.03.2023 and the Counsel searched status of the matter and found that the matter was henceforth listed on 13.03.2023 instead of 17.03.2023 and the same has been dismissed for non-present of the Applicant.
Since the conduct of the applicant has never been in disobedience of the orders passed by the Tribunal there was no willful intention of the applicant not to obey, the present application filed by the applicants for restoration of the S.A No.172 of 2022. If the present application for restoration of present SA is not allowed grave loss and prejudice shall be caused to the applicant.
Heard Ld. Counsel for the Parties and argued that the property in question has already been sold and applicant want to get excess **ORDER-SHEET** Page No. ....
**DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, DEHRADUN** **M.A. No. 15 of 2023**
**Shri Surendra Vs. Canara Bank**
amount of sale. Ld. Counsel for respondent bank has argued that the order may be passed in SA and there is no objection to the respondent bank if the matter is restored and the prayer shall be allowed in S.A.. Hence the prayer of applicant is allowed and the order dated 13.03.2023 is set aside.
Securitization Application No. 172/2022 Shri Surendra Vs. Canara Bank is restored to its original number.
M.A. No. 15 of 2023 is disposed off accordingly.
**S.A. No. 172 of 2022**
Put up S.A. No. 172 of 2022 on **25.09.2026** for further proceedings.
*Copy of this order be placed on S.A. No. 172 of 2022.*
(Umesh Kumar Sharma) Presiding Officer DRT, Dehradun
23.07.2026