Disposed

Gaurav Gupta & Ors. v. Union Bank of India

Delhi HC12 Aug 2025W.P.(C)/12144/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of a DRAT order staying possession of their property conditioned on depositing the outstanding bank dues. Confronted with the undertaking-based order, counsel sought withdrawal; the Court permitted withdrawal but refused liberty to reopen the matter via a proposed application before DRAT/DRT, disposing of the petition accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Petition permitted to be withdrawn; no liberty granted to reopen matter via application before DRAT/DRT.

Gaurav Gupta & Ors. Vs Union Bank of India — Banking and Recovery | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~59

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 12144/2025, CM APPL. 49538/2025, CM APPL. 49539/2025 & CM APPL. 49540/2025

¶4

GAURAV GUPTA & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Vivek Sood, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Akshat Aggarwal, Mr. Mohit Aggarwal, Ms. Khushi Aggarwal, Ms. Sunita Kamath and Ms. Medhavi Judevi, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION BANK OF INDIA .....Respondents Through: Mr. Manish Shanker Srivastava, Advs.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

¶10

O R D E R % 12.08.2025

¶11

By way of the present Petition filed under Article 226 read with 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners pray of issuance of writ of certiorari to quash Order dated 18.07.2025 [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order” ] passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Delhi [“DRAT”] . Paragraphs 10 and 11 of the Impugned Order reads as under:-

¶12

“10. Ld. Sr. Advocate for the appellants on instruction states that the appellants have paid Rs. 8,20,000/ - towards 25% predeposit. Ld. Sr. Advocate further states that the appellants are ready to deposit Rs.5 lacs by tomorrow and will pay the entire amount within one month to the respondent bank. The Ld. counsel and officer of the respondent has no objection in case the entire amount is deposited by the appellants within one month.

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/08/2025 at 13:46:10

¶14

11. In view of above, since the appellants are ready to pay Rs.5.00 lacs by tomorrow i.e. 19.07.2025 and the entire outstanding amount along with interest within four weeks to the respondent bank, the physical possession of the property in question scheduled for today is stayed. However, it is made clear that in case of default, the respondent bank is at liberty to take possession of the property through very same receiver.”

¶15

Learned Senior Counsel representing the Appellant does not dispute that the aforesaid order was passed on the undertaking given by the Appellants. However, he submits that there is dispute with regard to the due amount and in absence of complete statement of accounts, he does not have instructions regarding the same.

¶16

On the confronted with the Paragraphs 10 and 11, learned Senior Counsel representing the Petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdraw the present Petition. It is to be noted here that Petitioners wish to file an application before DRAT/DRT, however, this Court is not granting any liberty to re-open the matter under the garb of the proposed application.

¶17

The Petition, along with pending applications, is accordingly disposed of with the aforegoing directions.

¶18

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

¶19

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. AUGUST 12, 2025 /sp/rgk

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/08/2025 at 13:46:10

Gaurav Gupta & Ors. v. Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav Gupta & Ors. v. Union Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Guddi Devi & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Sheela Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Jnrb International LLP Vs Commissioner of Customs

Virender Kumar Chopra Vs Raj Kumar Prop

Ravinder Kumar Vs Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force and Ors.

India Tourism Development Corporation Vs K.A. Kanekar

Sushen Mohan Gupta Vs the Joint Director (ADJ-3), Directorate of Enforcement and Anr.

Anoop Singh Vs Muncipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Sh. Bhishma Tyagi, through His Spa (Lokendra Tyagi) Vs Mrs. Jyotsna Singh

Drharors Aesthetics Private Ltd. Vs Rahul Shawel

Kavita Arora & Anr. Vs Deepak Arora & Ors.

Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board Vs Nageshwar Sharma Sole Prop of M/S Sarthak Construction Co.

Manish Jain Vs Ishita Jain

Sanjiv Chaturvedi Vs the Cpio Intelligence Bureau (Ib)