K2 Metals Pvt. Ltd. v. Uco Bank Ltd.

Bombay HC26 Feb 2025WP/556/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

K2 Metals Pvt Ltd UCO Bank writ petition 556 of 2025 Bombay High Court disposed as withdrawn; show-cause notice 18 October 2024 Exhibit A; impugned order 16 December 2024 Exhibit B Competent Authority UCO Bank withdrawn; prayer clause (a) not pressed; statement accepted; decide afresh per Master Circular of RBI and judgments of Apex Court; all contentions kept open; Revati Mohite Dere Dr. Neela Gokhale JJ; 26 February 2025; banking show-cause notice quashing petition withdrawal.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of as withdrawn; UCO Bank to withdraw its order dated 16 December 2024 passed by its Competent Authority and decide afresh in accordance with the Master Circular of the RBI and the judgments of the Apex Court; all contentions of all parties kept open. ¶¶23

K2 Metals Pvt. Ltd. vs Uco Bank Ltd. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the show-cause notice dated 18 October 2024 (Exhibit 'A' to the Petition) ought to be quashed and set aside. +1 more

¶¶12

Ratio / Principle

The Court accepted the statement of learned counsel for the Respondent-UCO Bank that the Bank will withdraw the order dated 16 December 2024 passed by its Competent Authority.

¶¶18

Key takeaways

After withdrawing the order dated 16 December 2024, the Respondent-UCO Bank is to decide afresh in accordance with the Master Circular of the RBI and the judgments of the Apex Court.ratio¶¶20
All contentions of all parties are kept open.ratio¶¶21
The Petition is disposed of as withdrawn on the aforesaid terms.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 556 of 2025 — K2 Metals Pvt. Ltd & Anr. v. UCO Bank Ltd. (High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction; Revati Mohite Dere & Dr. Neela Gokhale, JJ.; 26 February 2025): The Petitioners sought quashing of a show-cause notice dated 18 October 2024 (Exhibit 'A') and of the impugned order dated 16 December 2024 (Exhibit 'B') passed by the Competent Authority of UCO Bank. Prayer clause (a) was not pressed at the outset. During the hearing, learned counsel for UCO Bank stated on instructions that the Bank would withdraw the order dated 16 December 2024; the statement was accepted. In view thereof, the Petitioners did not press the Petition and sought leave to withdraw it. The Court directed that, after withdrawing the order, UCO Bank shall decide afresh in accordance with the Master Circular of the RBI and the judgments of the Apex Court, and kept all contentions of all parties open. The Petition was disposed of as withdrawn on these terms. No merits adjudicated; no specific statute provision or precedent applied.

¶1

2025:BHC-OS:3419-DB

¶2

4-wp-556-2025.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.556 OF 2025

¶6

K2 Metals Pvt. Ltd & Anr. …..Petitioners Vs. UCO Bank Ltd. …..Respondent

¶7

Mr. Aayush Kothari with Ms. Mitali Shahane, Mr. Vinod Kothari,Mr. Kshitij Parekh, i/b. M/s. Apex Law Partners, for the Petitioners. Mr. Sidhanth S. Kumar, i/b. BTG Advaya, for the Respondent No.1UCO Bank.

¶8

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &

¶9

DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE : 26^th FEBRUARY 2025.

¶10

P.C.:-

¶11

By this Petition, the Petitioners essentially seek quashing

¶12

and setting aside of the show-cause notice dated 18^th October 2024, which is at Exhibit ‘A’ to the Petition, as well as quashing and setting aside of the impugned order dated 16^th December 2024, which is at Exhibit ‘B’ to the Petition. At the outset, Mr. Aayush Kothari, learned counsel for the Petitioners, on instructions, states that he does not press prayer clause (a).

¶13

During the course of hearing, learned counsel appearing

¶14

for the Respondent-UCO Bank, on instructions, states that the UCO

1/2

Gaikwad RD

4-wp-556-2025.doc

Bank will withdraw the order dated 16^th December 2024 passed by the Competent Authority of the UCO Bank. Statement accepted.

¶19

In view of the aforesaid statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the UCO Bank, learned counsel for the Petitioners does not press this Petition and seeks leave to withdraw the same.

¶20

Needless to state, that after withdrawing the order dated 16^th December 2024, the Respondent-UCO Bank to decide afresh, in accordance with the Master Circular of the RBI and the judgments of the Apex Court.

¶21