Second appeal withdrawn at the instance of the appellant on counsel's instructions, without adjudication; the second respondent's cross-objections, not pursued, were dismissed in default for want of prosecution. No substantive issue was decided.
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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
201
RSA-394-1996 XOBJS-17-C-2002 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.01.2026
Bank of Maharashtra …..Appellant Vs.
F.C.I. and Another .….Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA
Present:Mr. Munish Yadav, Advocate for the appellant.
Mr. Pranav Chadha, Advocate for respondent No.1.
None for respondent No.2.
DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
Learned counsel for the appellant has made a statement so as
to withdraw the appeal under the instruc"ons of the appellant. It is also informed that cross-objec"ons had been filed by respondent No.2, who is not pursuing the same.
In view of the above, the appeal is hereby dismissed as withdrawn; whereas cross-objec"ons are dismissed in default for want of
prosecu"on.
(DEEPAK GUPTA)
JUDGE January 16, 2026 Nee"ka Tuteja Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No
NEETIKA TUTEJA 2026.01.16 13:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Bank of Maharashtra
F.C.I.
Deepak Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
