Yadav Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. Thou MD v. the Managing Director, Bank of India

Bombay HC24 Jul 2024IA/9787/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Interim order in a writ petition by an award-holder against Bank of India seeking payment of Rs. 4,35,55,24,863.45. The Court took the respondent's affidavit with annexures on record and directed that the interim application be heard and decided alongwith the related writ petitions, which are to be tagged together. No substantive decision was made.

What the court decided

AI extract

Yadav Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. Thou MD vs the… — Banking and Recovery | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

IA 9787 of 2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 9787 OF 2024 IN

¶4

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9159 OF 2022

¶5

Yadav Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. Through MD

¶6

...Petitioner

¶7

vs.

¶8

The Managing Director, Bank of India

¶9

...Respondent

¶10

¶11

Mr. Prakash Yadav	Petitioner in-person
Mr. Anant B. Shinde	Advocate for the Respondent

¶12

¶13

CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J.

¶14

DATE : 19^th NOVEMBER 2024

¶15

P. C. :-

¶16

1. Heard Petitioner in-person and learned Advocate for

¶17

Respondent-Bank of India.

¶18

On the Writ Petition filed by the present Petitioner/award

¶19

holder, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has disposed of the petition as withdrawn and granted liberty to him to approach the High Court as

¶20

per order dated 12.03.2018 which is on page no. 19 of the Interim

¶21

Application No. 9787 of 2024. As per this liberty, the Petitioner has

¶22

filed Writ Petition Nos. 9159 of 2022 and 3809 of 2018. Now the

¶23

1/2

¶24

Seema

¶25

IA 9787 of 2024.doc

¶26

present Interim Application is filed praying for issuing direction to the Respondent No. 1-Bank to pay him an amount of Rs. 4,35,55,24,863.45/-. This is prayer ‘b’ of the Interim application. The Petitioner is not pressing prayer clause ‘a’. The Respondent-Bank has already filed reply. However, it is without annexures. Now the affidavit alongwith annexures is taken on record and marked as ‘Annexure-X’. There is also rejoinder filed by the Petitioner.

¶27

If the prayer clause ‘b’ of this Interim Application and prayer clause ‘B’ of the Writ Petition No. 9159 of 2022 and prayer clause ‘A’ of Writ Petition No. 3809 of 2018 are perused, this Court feels that Interim Application can be heard and decided alongwith both the Petitions.

¶28

So let this Interim Application be heard and decided alongwith both the Writ Petitions. Let Writ Petition No. 2847 of 2022 be also tagged with this petition.

¶29

Both the Parties are directed to give list of the dates and events on the next date.

¶30

Matter be kept on 07^th January 2025.

¶31

Signed by: Seema Yelkar Seema Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 22/11/2024 11:18:47

¶32

2/2

Yadav Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. Thou MD v. the Managing Director, Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Yadav Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. Thou MD v. the Managing Director, Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shalutai Tukaram Mane vs Bhaskar Pandurang Gurav

Bhama Pandharinath Bhakare Since Deceased through Legal Heirs vs Bhagchand Hari Bhaik

M. H. Patel vs City and Industrial Development Corporation and Ors.

Petras Yakoba Bankar (Deceased) vs Kamlesh Harprasad Garg

Ashutosh Madhav Ghare vs Abbas G. Lakdawalla

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Precious Plasto Packing Pvt. Ltd.