Dismissed

Dr. Jaidip Das v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC22 Aug 2019CWJC/8017/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a DRT certificate judgment, holding that the petitioner failed to file a statutory appeal under Section 20 of the RDBFI Act. Liberty was granted to approach the court after exhausting remedies.

What did the court decide?

The writ application is dismissed but with liberty to the petitioner to avail remedy if available in accordance with law.

Dr. Jaidip Das Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Banking and Recovery | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8017 of 2017

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Dr. Jaidip Das Son of Dr. Binay Kumar Das resident of Amla Tola, Mangal Bazar, Chanakya Tower, Police Station - Nagar Thana, District - Katihar.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Zonal Manager, Central Bank of India, Zonal Office, Maurya Lok Complex, Patna.

¶8

The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Purnia.

¶9

The Branch Manager, Cental Bank of India, Main Branch, Katihar, New Market Road, District - Katihar

¶10

Smt. Sutapa Das wife of Sri Dr. Jaidip Das resident of Amla Tola, Mangal Bazar, Chanakya Tower Katihar, Distt. Katihar.

¶11

Smt. Keya Biswas wife of Late Santosh Kumar Biswas resident of Green Soap Para, Katihar, Distt. - Katihar.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Bank : Mr. Prabhakar Jha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anuj Kumar, A.C. to G.P.24 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 22-08-2019 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Prabhakar Jha, learned counsel for the Bank as also learned counsel for the State are present.

¶15

It appears that the writ application has been preferred against the judgment of the Certificate issued by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in exercise of it’s power under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks, Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1993’) learned counsel for the Bank is correct in saying that the impugned

¶16

Patna High Court CWJC No.8017 of 2017(2) dt.22-08-2019 2/2

¶17

judgment is an appealable judgment in terms of Section 20 of the Act of 1993 and if the petitioner has not availed the statutory remedy of appeal there is no reason why a writ application be entertained at this stage by this court.

¶18

In the given facts and circumstances of the case, the writ application is dismissed but with liberty to the petitioner to avail his remedy if any available in accordance with law.

¶19

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶20

Rajeev/-

¶21

Dr. Jaidip Das v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Jaidip Das v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The United India Insurance Company Limited, Through Its Divisional Manager Vs Rinki Devi and Or

M/s Arun Construction Co. Vs The State of Bihar

Piyush Kumar Vs The Bihar State Food and Civil Supply Corporation

Kamlesh Kumar Sinha Vs Vijaya Bank Through Its Manager and Ors.

Anup Kumar Dokania Vs The State Bank Of India and Ors.

Ram Shankar Singh Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.