Petitioners sought withdrawal of a writ petition with reserved rights to approach the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. The court disposed of the petition as withdrawn, noting the underlying issue remained open for determination before the DRAT.
Writ petition and miscellaneous application dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
$~5
ANIL BHATIA & ANR ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Hament Choudhary, Mr.Pradeep Kumar Kaushik, Dr.Sunil Kumar, Advs.
versus
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ..... Respondent Represented by:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 13.01.2016 CM 1055/2016
Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 264/2016 & CM 1054/2016 (stay)
W.P.(C) 264/2016
page 1 of 2
writ petitioners would rely upon to bring home the point that incomplete order dated August 25, 2015 filed before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal was a mistake and not a deliberate act.
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
JANUARY 13, 2016 ‘ga’
W.P.(C) 264/2016 page 2 of 2
Anil Bhatia & Anr
Punjab National Bank
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
