Remanded

Vasant Laxman Bhat v. M/S. Arcil and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Jul 2022WP/8698/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay quashed an order dated 29th June 2022 passed by the Recovery Officer who did not hear the parties. The matter was remanded for de novo consideration to a different Recovery Officer who shall hear all parties and pass a reasoned order within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed and matter remanded to an alternate Recovery Officer to hear all parties and pass a reasoned order within six weeks.

Vasant Laxman Bhat Vs M/S. Arcil and Ors. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

905-WP-8698-2022.doc

¶2

1 / 2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY Digitally PURTI signed byPURTIPRASAD CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PRASAD PARAB PARAB Date:2022.07.28 10:35:00 +0530 WRIT PETITION NO. 8698 OF 2022

¶4

Vasant Laxman Bhat ….Petitioner

¶5

V/s. M/s. Arcil and Ors. …Respondents

¶6

¶7

Mr. R.S. Apte, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Parag Kale, Ms. Vaishali Vanjara and Ms. Dhanashree Bhate for Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Ranjeev Carvalo a/w Mr. Sachin Chandrana, Ms. Mitali Adukia i/b Manilal Kher Ambalal & Co. for Respondent No.1.

¶9

Mr. Sanjay Palekar for Respondent Nos. 2 to 9.

¶10

Ms. Manjual Rao a/w Ms. Vaishali Bhikule and Ms. Sarika Gawde i/b Manmohan Rao for Respondent Nos.10, 11 and 12.

¶11

Mr. Vinit Jain for Respondent No.14.

¶12

¶13

CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & A.S. DOCTOR, JJ. DATED : 22^nd JULY, 2022

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

In this petition, an order dated 29^th June 2022 is impugned on various grounds, one of the ground being the Recovery Officer who passed the order impugned in the petition is not the officer who heard the parties. The

¶16

Recovery Officer is Respondent No.13. Respondent No.13 in the impugned

¶17

order records as under :

¶18

“While pronouncing the aforesaid order of arrest of C.D. No.2 in a open court, learned advocate for C.D. No.2, opposed the pronouncement of order on the ground that he has not argued his case. He had argued his case before my predecessor. He submitted that he is ready to argue his case today.”

¶19

Purti Parab

¶20

905-WP-8698-2022.doc

¶21

2 / 2

¶22

Having heard the counsel following order is passed by consent : (a) The impugned order dated 29^th June 2022 being Exhibit 252 impugned in this petition is quashed and set aside.

¶23

(b) The matter is remanded for denovo consideration to Recovery Officer, other than the person who has passed the impugned order, who shall after hearing and considering the submissions to be made by all the parties pass on merits reasoned order as he deems fit, in accordance with law.

¶24

¶25

Petition disposed.

¶26

(A.S. DOCTOR, J.) ( K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)

¶27

Purti Parab

Vasant Laxman Bhat v. M/S. Arcil and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vasant Laxman Bhat v. M/S. Arcil and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Spie Capag S.A. Vs the Office of the Commissioner of Customs and Anr.

Om Consulting Services through Its Proprieror Om Prakash R. Pandey Vs Union of India and Ors.

Shalaka Infra-Tech India Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sarla Polyester Limited Vs the Union of India and Anr.

Prakash Overseas Thr. Sole Working Partner Sanjay Anup Jain Vs Union of India Thr. the Joint Secretary Dept. of Revenue Ministry of Finance and Ors.

Kastur Pulse Mill Vs Union of India and Ors.