Disposed

M/S Trust Diagnostic Centre through Its Proprietor Sri Jatin Sahay v. Bank of India through Its General Manager

Jharkhand HC5 Aug 2024WPC/848/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeared to be a summary order in a writ petition. The Court noted an affidavit from the Bank stating the matter was settled via an OTP Mutual Settlement Agreement. Counsel for all parties accepted the settlement. The Court held the petition infructuous and disposed of it.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of as infructuous. Pending petitions disposed of accordingly.

M/S Trust Diagnostic Centre through Its Proprietor… — Banking and Recovery | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 848 of 2024

¶3

----

¶4

1.M/s Trust Diagnostic Centre through its Proprietor Sri Jatin Sahay aged about 55 years son of late Rajkishore Sahay, Tharpakana, PS Lower Bazar, District Ranchi

¶5

2.Anshu Sahay, aged about 52 years, wife of Sri Jatin Sahay, Tharpakana, Lower Bazar, District Ranchi .... Petitioners

¶6

-- Versus --

¶7

1.Bank of India through its General Manager, Ranchi

¶8

2.General Manager, Bank of India, Ranchi

¶9

3.Zonal Manager, Bank of India, PS Chutia, District Ranchi

¶10

4.Chief Manager, Bank of India, Shyamli Branch, Doranda, Ranchi

¶11

5.A.G.M. (Recovery) Bank of India, Main Road, PS Chutia, District Ranchi

¶12

6.State of Jharkhand through Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi

¶13

7.State Bank of India, Stressed Assets Recovery Branch (10201), Ranchi

¶14

.... Respondents

¶15

¶16

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶17

For the Petitioners	:-	Mr. Rajendra Krishna, Advocate Mr. Pratyush Shounikya, Advocate Mr. Shubham Mayank, Advocate
For the State	:-	Mr. Rakesh Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the Bank of India	:-	Mr. Amresh Kumar, Advocate
For the SBI	:-	Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate ----

¶18

12 /05.08.2024 Mr. Rajendra Krishna, the learned counsel for the petitioners

¶19

submits that Bank of India has filed an affidavit dated 02.08.2024 wherein it has been disclosed that in view of earlier order passed by this Court and the meeting held with the officials of Bank of India and the petitioners the matter has been settled.

¶20

Mr. Amresh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf

¶21

1 W.P.(C) No. 848 of 2024

¶22

of the respondent Bank of India submits that Jatin Sahay has agreed to deposit 0.30 crore towards OTS of M/s Sahay and Associates against total O/s of Rs.1.59 crore which will be deposited within 45 days failing which this mutual agreement for this account will be treated to be null and void. He submits that in view of above, now the Key has been handed over to the petitioner and the petitioner will maintain the equipment kept therein.

¶23

Mr. Rajendra Krishna, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that so far as the key is handed over to the petitioners and as the concern was shown by this Court with regard to leakage of helium gas, every care will be taken by the petitioners and it will be ensured that the said gas will not spread in nearby locality.

¶24

Mr. Pati, the learned counsel for the State Bank of India and Mr. Rakesh Kumar Roy, the learned counsel for the respondent State accepts said submission in view of the affidavit filed by the Bank of India.

¶25

In view of above it appears that this petition has become infructuous.

¶26

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of as infructuous.

¶27

Pending petition if any also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶28

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶29

SI/,

¶30

2 W.P.(C) No. 848 of 2024

M/S Trust Diagnostic Centre through Its Proprietor Sri Jatin Sahay v. Bank of India through Its General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Trust Diagnostic Centre through Its Proprietor Sri Jatin Sahay v. Bank of India through Its General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Prasad Mallah Alias Vijay Prasad Malla Vs Union of India through C.B.I

Kajal Gorai Vs Union of India through CBI

Mintu Naskar Vs Enforcement Directorate, Ranchi through Its Assistant Director (Pmla)

Babu Lal Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Babu Lal Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Urmila Pandey Vs the Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Road Transport and Highways