The High Court disposed of the writ petition as the petitioner's grievance no longer survived following a confirmation that the respondent company was declared an N.P.A. by the Reserve Bank of India.
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.
Mhi
WP-50-17.doc
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 50 OF 2017
Yogesh Dhirajlal Vora Petitioner
Versus
Reserve Bank of India Anr.
Respondents
Mr.M.G.Agre, for the Petitioner. Ms. Vaishali Bhilare, for respondent No.4.
CORAM : RANJIT MORE & SMT. SADHANA S.JADHAV,JJ. DATE : 20th April, 2018.
P.C. :
Learned counsel for respondent No.4, at the outset, having taken instructions, makes a statement that respondent No.5 – Shri Sai Otto Tubes Mills Ltd. is already declared N.P.A. Statement is accepted.
[SMT. SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.]
[RANJIT MORE,J.]
Yogesh Dhirajlal Vora
Reserve Bank of India
Ranjit More
Sadhana S. Jadhav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
