The Bombay High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging DRT and DRAT orders without granting indulgence, keeping natural justice issues open for challenge to final adjudication.
Writ petition disposed of keeping issues open with liberty to place additional material before the DRT.
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.
WP-1320-12
skc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1320 OF 2012
Anup Sachanand Harchandrai ..Petitioner
versus
Bank of India & Ors.
..Respondents
Mr. Manish Mirpuri with Mr. Rushabh Thakker i/b. Mr. Yashpal Jain and Mr. Suprabh Jain for Petitioner.
Mr. Satish Shetye with Ms. Gaurangi Pujara i/b. Little & Co. for Respondent No. 1.
CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ.
10 October 2012
P.C. :
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel
for the respondent no. 1.
14.12.2009 during the pendency of the Original Application as well as order passed by DRAT dated 24.5.2012. It is not in dispute that the Original
1/2
WP-1320-12
skc
Application is pending on the file of DRT - I, Mumbai for final adjudication.
issues open with liberty to the petitioner to place additional material, if any, before the DRT.
Chandka
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether indulgence should be shown in the present writ petition during pendency of the Original Application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anup Sachanand Harchandrai
Bank of India
D. D. SINHA
V. K. TAHILRAMANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
