Disposed

M/s.Santosh Trading Company v. The Kotak Mahindra Bank

Telangana HC4 Feb 2022WP/6298/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This interlocutory application sought an extension of time to pay outstanding bank dues under Section 151 CPC. The court noted that the applicant had already made the required payment, leading to the disposal of the petition without granting a further extension.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of as the petitioners claimed to have already made the scheduled payment.

M/s.Santosh Trading Company Vs The Kotak Mahindra Bank — Banking and Recovery | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA

¶6

l.A.NO.2 0F 2022

¶7

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 6298 OF 2022

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/s.Santosh Trading Company, Rep.by its Proprietor Mr.Juluri Jayashankar S/o.late J.Ramnadham, Aged 55 years, Occ- Business, R/o.H.No.i1-29-298l 2' N/ v'colony' Deshaipet' warangal' TS

¶11

AND

¶12

,.pETraoNER/pETrroNER

¶13

The Kotak Mahindra Bank, Branch Office- 8-9-32 to 33/1 , 1st Floor, Station Road, Chowrastha, Warangal-506002, Telangana, Rep.by its Authorized Officer

¶14

...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT

¶15

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant an extension of eight (8) weeks furlher time to pay the balance amount of Rs.14,70,000/ {o comply with the Orders d1.04.02.2022 passed by this Hon'ble Coud in WP No.6298/2022

¶16

This petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon reading the order daled 04.02.2022 in W.P.No.629B of 2022 and upon hearing the arguments of Sri T. Sridhar Reddy, Counsel for the petitioner and of none appeared on behalf of sole respondent, the court made the following: ORDER

¶17

"Heard^{Mr. T.SridharReddy,} learned^counsel for the applicant.

¶18

Applicant was the petitioner in W.P.No.6298 of 2022, which was disposed of vide order dated O4.O2.2O22 directing the petitioner to pay 15% ofthe outstanding dues within 3O days.

¶19

This interlocutory application was filed for extension of time to make the payment.

¶20

¶21

Today when the matter is called upon, learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has already made the above payment, the last payment being made on O3.O3.2O22. Thus, total lS"h of the outstanding dues have been paid as directed by this Court.

¶22

In view thereof, I.A. is disposed of."

¶23

sD/-G.9TREESHA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY'

!-i.,-.'

SECTION OFFICER

To, 1. The Authorized Officer, Kotak Mahindra Bank, Branch Office- 8-9-32 to 33/1 , 1st Floor, Station Road, Chowrastha, Warangal-506002, Telangana. 2. One CC to Sri Sridhar Reddy Talasani Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies 4. One Spare Copy IVBC BS

¶28

HI H COURT

¶29

DATED: 0110412022

¶30

( ?- HE S r-A f e
<br>iaJco 1 6 Juil li}i/ O
.<br>*
sparClJ

¶31

ORDER

¶32

!.A.NO.2 0F 2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO: 6298 OF 2022

¶33

DISPOSING OF THE I.A.

¶34

(t)/:\

M/s.Santosh Trading Company v. The Kotak Mahindra Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Santosh Trading Company v. The Kotak Mahindra Bank

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

Momin Mahaboob Liaquath Ali Vs Karnataka Bank Ltd. and 5 Others

A. Murali Mukund Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

A. Murali Mukund Vs The State of Telangana

Mrs. Bharathi Pathakoti Vs Aditya Birla Housing Finance Ltd., and another

M/s. Velagapudi Steels Limited. Vs Canara Bank (E Syndicate Bank)

Dr. M. v. Ramana Rao Vs Uco Bank and 2 Others