The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed against a bank. The court noted the petitioner failed to deposit dues or file the required undertaking and refused to take any coercive or further direction in the writ proceedings.
No further order or direction required; petitioner to approach Debt Recovery Tribunal.
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.
$~4.
SONALI KAPOOR ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Ajay Khanna, Advocate.
versus
PUNJAB AND SIND BANK ..... Respondent Through Mr. Ajay Dabas & Ms. Priyanka Dagar, Advocates.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
O R D E R % 20.07.2018
On 27th June, 2018, the writ petitioner had given a statement that the total outstanding amount was approximately Rs.32 lacs and the entire outstanding amount would be deposited with the respondent bank within three weeks. Undertaking in form of an affidavit was to be filed within two days with the Registrar General of this Court. On the said undertaking being filed, the respondent bank was not to take coercive steps.
The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
CHANDER SHEKHAR, J.
JULY 20, 2018 VKR
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be disposed of as the petitioner failed to file undertaking to deposit outstanding dues or apply to Debt Recovery Tribunal.
SONALI KAPOOR
PUNJAB AND SIND BANK
SANJIV KHANNA
CHANDER SHEKHAR
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
