The Allahabad High Court dismissed a review application as wholly misconceived, noting that the applicant failed to raise the contention regarding no demand of police charges during the original hearing. The court held that the legal position remains unchanged for individual petitioner review.
Review application dismissed as misconceived.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 39
Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. - 60 of 2023 Applicant :- State Bank Of India Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.
Heard Sri Vivek Mishra, learned counsel for the review applicant and Sri Apurva Hajela, learned Standing Counsel for the Staterespondents.
This is a wholly misconceived application seeking review of the judgment and order dated 04.01.2023 whereby we have decided the issue relating to the demand of charges/costs/expenses by the police authorities for providing the police force, to hand over the possession of the secured asset to the secured creditor under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
The contention of the learned counsel for the review applicant is that there was no demand of the police authorities in the instant writ petition and as such this petition has been wrongly decided just because of being tagged with the bunch.
This submission of the learned counsel for the review applicant is turned down, taking note of the fact that during the course of hearing, the counsel for the review applicant, who was appearing for the petitioner therein, did not make any such submission.
Moreover, the issue decided in the judgment and order dated 04.01.2023 cannot be reviewed for one or the other individual petitioner, inasmuch as, the legal position relating to the aforesaid demand has been stated therein.
We may also note that while passing the judgment and order dated 04.01.2023, we have granted liberty to the secured creditor to realise the cost/expenses, deposited for providing the police force from the borrower.
The review application is, accordingly, dismissed as misconceived.
Order Date :- 24.2.2023 P Kesari
Digitally signed by :- PRACHI KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
State Bank Of India
State Of U.P.
Sunita Agarwal
Vipin Chandra Dixit
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
