SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Chief Manager, Bank of Baroda, Dhanbad Branch – Appellant
Versus
Amit Pandey – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
All these writ petitions since involve the similar issues and as such the same have been directed to be listed together and have been heard together and now being disposed of by this common order.
2. The writ petition is under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wherein order passed on 28.07.2017 (annexure-5) in Civil Misc. Appeal No.07 of 2017 by the Principal District Judge, Dhanbad, is under challenge, whereby and whereunder the order dated 04.01.2017 passed in Original Suit No.132 of 2016 rejecting petition under Order 39 Rule 1 and Rule 2 has been reversed by directing the respondent no.2, the petitioner herein, not to dispossess the plaintiff to the suit to the suit premises without following the due process of law till the disposal of the original suit.
3. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made in these writ petitions is that the petitioner bank has sanctioned the loan by keeping the property in question mortgaged by a collateral security on 17.12.2009, again having become non-performing assets a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter refer
Harshad Govardhan Sondagar Vs. International Assets Recontruction Co. Ltd. and Ors.
Surya Dev Rai Vs. Ram Chander Rai and Ors.
Shalini Shyam Shetty Vs. Rajendra Shankar Patil
Dalmia Jain Airways Ltd. Vs. Sukumar Mukherjee
Mani Nariman Daruwala Vs. Phiroz N. Bhatena
Laxmikant Revchand Bhojwani Vs. Pratapsing Mohansingh Pardeshi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.