Dismissed

Canara Bank, Rep. by Its Aut. Sign, Geetha Yashodhar v. State of Goa, Rep. by Its Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC23 Jun 2021WP/156/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the Canara Bank sought mandamus for the State of Goa to take action under the SARFAESI Act. The Court found that in all instances, either possession was already handed over, the matter was pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, or a settlement had been reached. Consequently, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of with liberty in the aforesaid manner.

Canara Bank, Rep. by Its Aut. Sign, Geetha Yashodhar Vs… — Banking and Recovery | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

Andreza -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 156 OF 2021

¶4

Canara Bank,

¶5

Rep. By its Aut. Sign Geetha
Yashodhar

¶6

…...Petitioners

¶7

V e r s u s

¶8

State of Goa

¶9

Rep. By its Chief Secretary & 2 Ors.

¶10

…...Respondents

¶11

Mr. Dhananjay Chavan and Mr. Sarvesh Bandekar, Advocates for the
Petitioners.

¶12

Mr. S. P. Munj, Additional Government Advocate for the Respondents.

¶13

Coram :-M. S. SONAK, J.

¶14

Date : 23rd June, 2021

¶15

P.C.

¶16

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

¶17

2. The Petitioners seek a writ of mandamus to the Respondents to

¶18

proceed with their action under the provisions of the Securitization and

¶19

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,

¶20

2002.

¶21

Andreza -2-

¶22

3. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners now agree that out of the

¶23

three instances referred to in the Petition, in the first instance, the possession
of the mortgaged premises has already been handed over to the Bank, in the

¶24

second instance, the matter is pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal
(DRTs) and in the third instance, some settlement has been reached between
the Bank and the borrower. Accordingly, no useful purpose will be served by

¶25

keeping this Petition pending.

¶26

4. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners pointed out that there are instances of unauthorised delegation of statutory powers by the Respondents. In an appropriate case, by giving full particulars and by seeking reliefs, the Petitioners can always address appropriate proceedings to redress such grievances. However, in the present case, it is not possible to go into such grievances.

¶27

5. This Petition is therefore disposed of with liberty as aforesaid.

¶28

M. S. SONAK, J.

¶29

ANDREZA PEREIRA Digitally signed by ANDREZA PEREIRA Date: 2021.06.24 14:50:20 +05'30'

Canara Bank, Rep. by Its Aut. Sign, Geetha Yashodhar v. State of Goa, Rep. by Its Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Canara Bank, Rep. by Its Aut. Sign, Geetha Yashodhar v. State of Goa, Rep. by Its Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vamneshwar Saunsthan, Rep. by Its Duly Const. Att., Gajanan Vasant Sinai Talaulikar., Vs Gajanan Babuso Sattarker and 3 Ors.

Varca Sports Club, Rep. Thr. Its Gen. Sec., Jimreeves Rodrigues E Rebello and 2 Ors., Vs Aires D'Costa @ Ayres Genesio Jose Estevam Da Costa, Thr. His Poa, Arjun D'Costa and 40 Ors.

The Deputy Collector, S.D.O. Ii, (Lao), Margao and Anr. Vs Mario Moraes and 4 Ors.

Babuso M. Naik and Anr., Vs Manohar M. Naik.

Muriel Singh and Anr., Vs Maria Santana D'Souza and 4 Ors.

Shivam Villa Private Limited., Rep. by Its Director, Sumit Singla Vs Gajanan Padiyar and Anr.