Disposed

M/S Linksons Projects and Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., through Its Director, Gaurav Y. Sangla and 2 v. the Authorised Officer, Pusad Urban Co-Op Bank Ltd., Pusad

Bombay HC21 Jun 2016CAW/2494/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Nagpur disposed of multiple civil applications related to writ petitions. The court permitted amendments, allowed new parties to join, served notices on intervenors, and stood over hearing of one application.

What did the court decide?

Leave to amend granted; additional respondents allowed to join; intervenor to serve copies; CKOM stood over to 12.7.2016.

M/S Linksons Projects and Infrastructures Pvt… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

wp1519 & 1520.15

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1519 OF 2015 M/s. Linksons International Club & Resorts Pvt. Ltd., thr its Director and ors

¶5

..vs..

¶6

Authorized Officer, Pusad, Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd., Talao Layout, Pusad and anr AND

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.1520 OF 2015 M/s. Linksons Projects & Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., thr its Director and ors ..vs..

¶8

Authorized Officer, Pusad, Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd., Talao Layout, Pusad

¶9

....................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders

¶10

Shri Rajnish Vyas, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Abhay Sambre, counsel for R-1.

¶11

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & KUM. I.K. JAIN, JJ. DATED : JUNE 21, 2016.

¶12

Civil Application (CAW) Nos.2493 and 2494 of 2015

¶13

Heard.

¶14

Subsequent events are sought to be brought on record. Though learned counsel appearing for the respondent is opposing the prayer, in the interest of justice, we grant leave to amend. Necessary amendment be carried out within a period of one week. Liberty to the respondents to file their additional affidavits, if any, within further period of one week.

¶15

The civil applications are disposed of.

¶16

Civil Application (CAW) Nos.939 and 960 of 2015

¶17

Heard.

¶18

The successful auction purchasers want to

.....2/-

wp1519 & 1520.15

intervene in the matter. This Court has, by interim orders, permitted auction to proceed further but subjected it to the outcome of the writ petition.

¶23

In this situation, applicants, M/s. Bajrang Craft Board as party respondent No.3 in Writ Petition No.1519 of 2015 and Shri Suresh S/o Deoraoji Doifode as party respondent No.2 in Writ Petition No.1520 of 2015, are allowed to be joined. Necessary amendment be carried out immediately.

¶24

Learned counsel Shri A.M. Ghare waives notice for the added respondents. The added respondents to file their replies, if any, within a period of two weeks.

¶25

The civil applications are disposed of.

¶26

Civil Application (CAW) Nos.1092 and 1093 of 2015

¶27

Heard.

¶28

Punjab National Bank, claiming to be the secured creditor, has filed these applications seeking intervention.

¶29

Learned counsel Shri Abhay Sambre for nonapplicant No.1-Cooperative Bank, seeks leave to file appropriate reply. He submits that as yet he has not been served with copies of the applications.

¶30

Learned counsel Shri M.Y Wadodkar for the intervenor to serve copies of the applications on parties to the writ petitions. The parties are free to file their replies,

.....3/-

wp1519 & 1520.15

within a period of three weeks.

¶35

Stand over to 12.7.2016.

¶36

JUDGE JUDGE

¶37

!! BRW !!

¶38

...../-

M/S Linksons Projects and Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., through Its Director, Gaurav Y. Sangla and 2 v. the Authorised Officer, Pusad Urban Co-Op Bank Ltd., Pusad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Linksons Projects and Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., through Its Director, Gaurav Y. Sangla and 2 v. the Authorised Officer, Pusad Urban Co-Op Bank Ltd., Pusad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ku. Huma Nargies D/O. Abdul Rafique Khatib Vs Maharashtra University of Health Sciences Nasik Thr Its Registrar and Others

Vijay S/O Namdevrao Uge Vs State of Mah., Dept. of Education through Its Principal Secretary and 4 Others

Arunoday Magasvargiya Mazoor Kamgar Sahakari Sanstha Ltd., Thr President Arvind H Gajbhiye Nagpur Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Secretary, Dept of Revenue and Forests, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Others

M/S Linkson International Club and Resorts Pvt. Ltd. through Director Yeshwant L. Sangla and 2 Othe Vs the Authorised Officer, Pusad Urban Co. Op. Bank Ltd. and Another

Smt. Mona W/O. Bhupender Kumar Varma and Another Vs State of Maha., through Its Secretary, Urban Devp. Dept. Mumbai and Others

Sharad S/O Namdeoappa Paraswar Vs Shri. Nandkumar Principal Secretary, Dept of School Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Others