Harish Hiralal Mehta v. Daksha Ajay Khatlawala and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
Search terms: praecipe; modification of order dated 06.10.2025; Bombay High Court Civil Appellate Jurisdiction; First Appeal (ST) 5261 of 2025; First Appeal (ST) 5269 of 2025; Appeal from Order 86 of 2025; Appeal from Order 93 of 2025; Interim Applications 1884, 1885, 1886, 1880, 1881, 1882 of 2025 (delay condonation, stay, intervention); Mukesh Hiralal Mehta; Harish Hiralal Mehta; Daksha Ajay Khatlawala; Respondent No.3 Bank; Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT); Original Application 103 of 2023; withdrawal of DRT proceedings; within four weeks vs after four weeks; advance notice to Appellant; modification opposed cannot be made by praecipe; Nikhil Sonar W3Legal; Prashant Shinde; S. M. Modak; decision 15.10.2025. Substance: title-clause typographical correction directed; modification prayer regarding direction (iii) rejected.
What did the court decide?
Title-clause correction allowed: the concerned Private Secretary directed to type the title clause of First Appeal (ST) No.5269 of 2025. The prayer to modify direction No.(iii) ('within four weeks' to 'after four weeks') for the Bank's withdrawal of Original Application No.103/2023 before the DRT is rejected; the Bank's Advocate indicated that advance notice will be given to the Appellant before withdrawal, which the Court held sufficient.