The High Court of Delhi dismissed a withdrawn writ petition wherein petitioners sought to challenge an attachment of property by a Recovery Officer, noting the correct remedy lies with the Recovery Officer.
Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn.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.
$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
POONAM CHOPRA & ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.B.N.Jha, Advocate
versus
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr.Karan Khanna, Advocate
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R % 14.03.2016
attachment by the Recovery Officer.
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
MARCH 14, 2016 mamta
page 2 of 2
W.P.(C) 7343/2015
Poonam Chopra & Ors
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
