ICICI BANK LTD Vs. MANJEET KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) C M No. 44422/2018 (for exemption)

(2.) It is the submission of Mr. Puneet K. Bhalla, learned counsel for the petitioner that the Tribunal has erred in inter alia holding that DRTIII has no jurisdiction. According to him, the DRT-III has proceeded on the premise that the address of the appellant Bank is at Tilak Nagar, New Delhi and even the defendant is based at Tilak Nagar, New Delhi, overlooking the fact that in the OA, the ICICI Bank has given its Delhi address as E-Block, Videocon Tower, Jhandewalan, Extension, New Delhi. That apart it is his submission that in the OA under the heading jurisdiction of the Tribunal, the relevant averments are as under:

(3.) That apart, he states the loan agreement in question was executed at the Videocon Tower, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi as is clear from Pages 29 and 41 of the paper book. He relies upon the judgment of this court in the case of M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. v. Naresh Yadav and Anr. W.P.(C) 10436/2018 by stating that the writ petition can be disposed of in terms of the said judgment itself as even the DRT had not issued any notice to the respondent in the Original Application.