This petition challenged an order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. The Bench held that since the order was appealable before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, the writ petition was not maintainable and dismissed it on that ground.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~9
ANURAG GUPTA ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Kuldeep Kumar, Advocate along with petitioner in person.
versus
HDFC BANK LTD. ..... Respondent
Represented by: None.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 03.03.2016
CM No.7165/2016 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 1662/2016
The impugned order has been passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal which is appealable before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal and therefore the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable.
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
MARCH 03, 2016
‘vn’
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging a debt recovery order is maintainable when the order is appealable before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal.
Anurag Gupta
HDFC Bank Ltd.
Pradeep Nandrajog
Mukta Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
