Allowed¶19

Kamlesh Manohar Kanungo v. Bureau of Immigration and 8 Ors.

Look Out Circular – quashing

Bombay HC19 Jun 2025WP/1654/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Look Out Circular; LOC; Look Out Notice; Bureau of Immigration; quashing of LOC; One Time Settlement; OTS; No Dues Certificate; Compromise Settlement; Union Bank of India; Bank of Baroda; Indian Bank; settled bank dues; immigration restraint; writ petition allowed; Bombay High Court; OOCJ; Writ Petition (L) No. 33506 of 2022; M.S. Karnik; N.R. Borkar

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the Look Out Notice/Circular issued by the Bureau of Immigration at the behest of the respondent banks. ¶19

Kamlesh Manohar Kanungo vs Bureau of Immigration and 8 Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

DINESH SADANAND SHERLA

¶2

Digitally signed by DINESH SADANAND SHERLA Date: 2025.06.17 11:07:43 +0530

¶3

1-oocjwp-1654-25.doc

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 33506 OF 2022

¶5

Kamlesh M. Kanungo … Petitioner V/s. Bureau of Immigration & Ors. … Respondents

¶6

Mr. Devashish Godbole a/w. Ryan Peters i/b Unadkat & Co. for the Petitioners.

¶7

Mr. D.P. Singh for Respondent Nos.1 & 9.

¶8

Mr. Kaushal Ameta i/b Legal Prism for Respondent No.2. Mr. Harish Sheth i/b MDP Legal for Respondent No-3 BoB.

¶9

CORAM : M.S. KARNIK & N.R. BORKAR, J.J. DATE : 16^th JUNE, 2025.

¶10

P.C.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.2-Union Bank of India and learned counsel for respondent No.3-Bank of Baroda.

¶12

So far as respondent No.5-Indian Bank is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the “No Dues Certificate” for loan settlement under One Time Settlement is produced along with the additional affidavit which is annexed at page No. 169 of the paper-book indicating that One Time Settlement/compromise amount of Rs.13,769 crore has been paid in full and as on date there is no dues of the Indian Bank in the subject account.

¶13

So far as the respondent No.2 - Union Bank of India and respondent No.3 - Bank of Baroda is concerned, the learned

1/2

Dinesh Sherla

1-oocjwp-1654-25.doc

counsel representing the respective banks submitted that all the outstandings have been cleared as per the OTS and No Dues Certificates under Compromise Settlement were issued to that effect.

¶18

In this view of the matter, the Look Out Circular issued is of no consequence now and therefore, there is no difficulty in quashing the Look Out Circular which is subject matter of the present petition. The Look Out Circular was issued by the Bureau of Immigration Department and at the behest of all these banks.

¶19

The petition is accordingly, allowed in the aforesaid terms by quashing the Look Out Notice/Circular, which is subject matter of the petition.

¶20

(N.R. BORKAR, J.)

¶21

(M.S. KARNIK, J.)

¶22

2/2

¶23

Dinesh Sherla

Kamlesh Manohar Kanungo v. Bureau of Immigration and 8 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamlesh Manohar Kanungo v. Bureau of Immigration and 8 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Cosmopolitan Education Society vs State of Maharashtra through the School Education and Sports Department

Shri. Nanaso Chimaji Patil vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sagar Shivaji Patil and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra Throu. Its Sec. Urban Development Dept and Anr.

Manoj Lalwani Director of Ritu Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. vs Reserve Bank of India Represented by Its Governer

Tardeo a/C Market Bldg vs Special Recovery and Sales Officer

Raigarh Jute and Textiles Mills Ltd. vs Asset Reconstruction Company(India) Limited and 5 Ors.