This petition challenges a bank possession notice. The Court held the writ not maintainable due to a Supreme Court decision expiring the interim order and applicable alternative remedy available.
The writ petition was disposed of allowing no relief.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P. (C) No.8810 of 2010
M/s. Pawan Putra Retrading Unit
Petitioner
Mr.A.K.Biswal, Advocate
-versus- State Bank of India, Titilagarh Branch and another
Opposite Parties
None
CORAM: JUSTICE S.K.MISHRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
Order No.
ORDER 14.07.2021
Page 1 of 2
4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Bichi
( S.K.Mishra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
Judge
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the bank's possession notice is maintainable in light of the Supreme Court decision in Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore and Another vrs- Mathew K.C.Referred¶13
AIR 2018 SC 676 · Who else cites this
M/s. Pawan Putra Retrading Unit
State Bank of India, Titilagarh Branch
S.K. Mishra
Savitri Ratho
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
