Petitioner challenged notices under the SARFAESI Act and auction of property situated in Punjab. Court noted jurisdictional issues per Amish Jain case. Petitioner withdrew petition with liberty to approach appropriate fora.
Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn by the petitioner with liberty to approach the appropriate fora.
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.
$~23
CM No.1053/2016 (for exemption)
W.P.(C) 263/2016
W.P.(C) 263/2016
Page 1 of 2
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J
JANUARY 13, 2016 ‘gsr’..
W.P.(C) 263/2016
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition impugning notices issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act.
Whether the petitioner may withdraw the petition with liberty to approach appropriate forums.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amish Jain Vs. ICICI BankReferred¶14
Amish Jain Vs. ICICI Bank 192 (2012) DLT 701 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Saket Steel Ltd.
Corporation Bank
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw
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
