Dismissed

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Ganpatram

Rajasthan HC25 May 2023SAW/441/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this special appeal challenging a Permanent Lok Adalat order, the High Court of Rajasthan held the writ appeal not maintainable. Following its Division Bench decision, the court ruled such challenges fall under Article 227, not Article 226, and accordingly dismissed the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Appeal against the order of the Permanent Lok Adalat dismissed as not maintainable under Article 226.

Hdfc Bank Limited Vs Ganpatram — Arbitration | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJD/017490]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 441/2023

¶4

Hdfc Bank Limited, Having Its Office At Roshan Plaza, Near Mahesh Building, Ranibazar, Bikaner And Its Registered Office At Hdfc Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, West Mumbai - 400013, Maharashtra Through Its Authorised Signatory Kesar Singh Bhati S/o Shri Raghuveer Singh Bhati.

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Ganpatram S/o Hariram, By Caste Singhad R/o Gram Rasisar, Tehsil Nokha, Distt Bikaner.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s)	: Dr. Sachin Acharya, Senior Advocate
	(through VC), assisted by Mr. Arpit
	Mehta
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Nishank Madan

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

Order

25/05/2023

Heard.

This appeal arises out of an order passed by the learned Single Judge in a petition challenging the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat.

¶15

Though, learned counsel for the appellants would place reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Jogendrasinghji Vijaysinghji Vs. State of Gujrat & Ors. [(2015) 9 SCC 1] to buttress submission that the writ appeal would be maintainable, we find that a Division Bench of this Court in the case of The New India Assurance Company Limited vs.

¶16

M/s. Divya Laxmi Fabrics & Anr. [2018(2) WLN 172 (Raj.)]

[2023/RJJD/017490]

[SAW-441/2023]

(2 of 2)

has held that a petition against the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat is essentially under Article 227 and not under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Supreme court in the case of Radhey Shyam & Ors. Vs. Chhabi Nath & Ors. [AIR 2015 SC 3269] has also decided this issue.

¶21

Considering that the Division Bench of this Court has already taken a view that against the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, the petition would be in the nature of petition under Article 227 of the Constitution, this appeal is accordingly held not maintainable.

¶22

The appeal is dismissed accordingly.

¶23

(YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT),J

¶24

(VIJAY BISHNOI),J

¶25

13-Babulal/-

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Ganpatram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Limited v. Ganpatram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Managing Director Vs Sanjay Nimbawat

Hukam Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Shankar Lal Vs Union of India

Shree Shanker Lime Udyog Vs Union of India

Mastan Singh Meena Vs the State of Rajasthan

Maharaja Ganga Singh Memorial College Vs State of Rajasthan