Writ petition challenging a recovery citation of ₹10,93,021 issued against the petitioner was dismissed as infructuous after counsel reported the dispute with the lending bank had been settled.
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.
| SL. No |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|---|
| WPMS No. 2387 of 2016 Hon’ble Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J. (1) Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the petitioner. (2) Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. (3) Petitioner has challenged recovery citation issued against him on 08.07.2016. By the said recovery citation, a sum of ₹10,93,021/- was sought to be recovered from him. (4) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to subsequent events, writ petition has become infructuous. He points out that the dispute was settled between the petitioner and the lending bank. (5) In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the petitioner, writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. |
|||
| ( Man oj Ku m ar Tiw ar i, J.) 04.06.2024 Aswal |
Petitioner
State of Uttarakhand
Manoj Kumar Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
