High Court held that DRAT's allowance of amendment is not final, permitting petitioner to challenge it at the final hearing. Writ petition disposed with specific directions keeping all contentions open.
Clarification that DRAT order lacks finality; writ petition disposed with directions.
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.
WPL-3199-13
SKC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 3199 OF 2013
Sunil M. Udashi ..Petitioner vs. Bank of India & Ors. ..Respondents
Mr. B. S. Nagar with Ms. Poonam Utekar i/b. Global Law Offices for Petitioner.
Mr. Ashish Metna and Mr. Amol Arote i/b. Goanka Law Associates for Respondent No. 1.
Mr. B. A. Desai – Senior Advocate for Respondent No. 9.
Mr. Harshad V. Gawde i/b. Manilal Kher Ambalal & Co. for ICICI Bank Ltd.
CORAM : V. M. KANADE, AND M. S. SONAK, JJ.
DATE : DECEMBER 16, 2013
P. C .
1] Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned
counsel for the Respondents.
2] The Petitioner has challenged the order passed by the DRAT
allowing the amendment filed by the Respondent No. 2 herein at the appellate stage. It is contended that the DRAT ought not to have
1/2
WPL-3199-13
SKC
allowed the amendment after the arguments of the Petitioner had been concluded. He has also made several other submissions challenging the order impugned.
3] We are informed that the matter is kept for arguments tomorrow and the learned Chairperson is likely to retire in a couple of weeks.
4] In our view, it would be appropriate in the circumstances if it is clarified that though the DRAT has allowed the said application, the said order will not attain finality and it will be still open for the Petitioner herein to challenge the said application for amendment at the final hearing of the appeal and all contentions raised by the Petitioner and the Respondents are kept open not only before the DRAT but the Petitioner would also be entitled to challenge the said amendment in the further proceedings which may be taken. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
[M. S. SONAK, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.]
Chandka
2/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether DRAT's interim allowance of amendment after petitioner's closing arguments lacks finality pending final hearing.
Whether petitioner can challenge the amendment at the final hearing.
Sunil M. Udashi
Bank of India
V. M. Kanade
M. S. Sonak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
