Petitioner's application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal had been pending for over nine months. The High Court permitted the petitioner to file a detailed urgency application and expected the DRT to consider it expeditiously, disposing of the petition.
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.
$~49
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sougat Sinha, Advocate
versus
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Mahesh K.Chaudhary, Advocate for PNB
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK CHAUDHARY HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RENU BHATNAGAR
CM APPL. 10497/2026
W.P.(C) 2159/2026
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 18/02/2026 at 12:58:42
VIVEK CHAUDHARY, J
RENU BHATNAGAR, J
FEBRUARY 16, 2026/ neha/sm
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 18/02/2026 at 12:58:42
1 issue framed by the court
Should the petitioner be permitted to move a detailed urgency application before the DRT where its application has been pending for over nine months?
INDIA SME ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK
VIVEK CHAUDHARY
RENU BHATNAGAR
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
