The High Court of Judicature at Patna dismissed a writ application, holding it infructuous after the respondent bank informed the Court that the matter was settled and the outstanding amount was paid.
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 JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16909 of 2016
======================================================
Pravin Kumar Singh Son of Sri Ram Bharosa Singh, Resident of Village - Mosadpur, P.O. - Tilrath, P.S. - Barauni, District - Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
... ... Respondents
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sanjesh Prasad, Advocate ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER
Mr. Sanjesh Prasad, learned counsel appears on behalf of the Respondent-Bank. Learned counsel has informed this Court that the matter has been settled between the parties and Bank has already been paid the outstanding amount.
In the aforesaid view of the matter, the writ application seems to have become infructuous. It is disposed off accordingly.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
vats/ved
U
Pravin Kumar Singh
State Bank of India
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
