Dismissed

Manju Devi & Ors. v. M/S Rbl Bank Ltd. & Ors.

Delhi HC1 Feb 2017W.P.(C)/11766/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a clarification application filed after a writ petition was concluded. It dismissed the application, holding that further orders should be sought before the Appellate Authority, not via a writ petition, and directed the main appeal to be heard without insisting on a deposit.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed with direction to seek further orders before Appellate Authority; main appeal to be heard without deposit.

Manju Devi & Ors. Vs M/S Rbl Bank Ltd. & Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

$~29

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 11766/2016

¶4

MANJU DEVI & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Anurag Jain, Adv.

¶5

versus

¶6

M/S RBL BANK LTD. & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Ms.Sushmita Banerjee, Adv. for R-1.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDIRA BANERJEE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 20.02.2017 CM No.6890/2017

¶11

Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

The application stands disposed of.

¶13

CM No.6891/2017 (for clarification of order dated 01.02.2017)

¶14

This application is purportedly for clarification of a judgment and order dated 01.02.2017 passed by this Bench in the writ petition filed by the petitioner.

¶15

By the judgment and order, of which clarification has been sought, this Court set aside the order impugned to the extent that each of the appellants had been required to pay 50% of the amount due from Ajay Kumar Gupta. The rest of the order was left untouched. We made it clear that we had not gone into the merits of the appeal. The appeal was to be disposed of in accordance with law without

¶16

insisting on any deposit.

¶17

We also directed that any prayer for interim relief might be considered in accordance with law. Such prayer might be turned down unless the conditions precedent for passing an interim order such a strong prima facie case, balance of convenience and the like are found to exist.

¶18

This application styled as an application for clarification is in effect and substance an application for further order with regard to the undertaking that was required to be given by the petitioners in terms of the order impugned. We did not interfere with the aforesaid direction. We only directed that the appeal, including any prayer for interim relief be heard without insisting on deposit.

¶19

Any application for further order should be made before the Appellate Authority and not by way of an application in a writ petition that has been disposed of.

¶20

The application is therefore, dismissed with the above directions.

¶21

DASTI.

¶22

INDIRA BANERJEE, J

¶23

ANIL KUMAR CHAWLA, J

¶24

FEBRUARY 20, 2017 gm

Manju Devi & Ors. v. M/S Rbl Bank Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manju Devi & Ors. v. M/S Rbl Bank Ltd. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dilip Paswan Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

M/S Panch Mohan Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Dr Commissioner of Customs & Ors.

Pappu Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Palika Youth Street Vendors Welfare Soceity (Regd) Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

N.C.Mahajan & Ors. Vs UOI & Ors.

Mohinder Pal Singh Vs Registrar of Co-Op. Societies & Ors.

Azad Bharat Congress Vs Election Commission of India

Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr. Vs Ashok Pal & Ors.

Deepak Khosla Vs Hon'Ble High Court of Delhi & Ors.

Havildar Saji Raj R Vs Union of India and Ors.

M/S Sheena Overseas Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs Assets Care & Reconstruction Enterprisee Ltd.(Acre)

Satyendra Kumar Jha Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sunil Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Digambar Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.