The court disposed of a writ petition filed to quash an auction notice. The petitioners sought to withdraw the petition, which was subsequently dismissed.
Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.411/2021(GM-RES)
BETWEEN
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI BHARATH K., ADVOCATE)
AND
UNION BANK OF INDIA HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NO. 1252, N.S. ROAD,
2
MYSURU 570001 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER
RESPONDENT
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH AUCTION NOTICE DTD.04.11.2020 IN REFERENCE TO LOAN TRANSACTION BEARING NO.0869/52/158 VIDE ZNNEXURE – E, ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARIGN THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER
Learned Advocate for the petitioners seeks leave
to withdraw the petition. He undertakes to file a memo to this effect. Once memo is received, Registry
shall keep the same in record.
2. Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
3
I.A.No.1/2021 does not survive for consideration and the same stands disposed of.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE
SBS*
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SRI P.P. MUHAMMED SON OF HAMZA
MRS. SOFIA
UNION BANK OF INDIA
P.S. DINESH KUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
