SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(SC) 2033

AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited – Appellant
Versus
Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Pensioners Welfare Association (Regd. ) – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. Mr. Baldev Singh, Adv. Mr. Divyansh Thakur, Adv. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Gupta, Adv. Mr. Roopesh Singh Bhadauria, Adv. Ms. Anya Singh, Adv. Ms. Chitwan Godara, Adv. Mr. Abhik Chimni, Adv. Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Singh, AoR
For the Respondents: Mr. Kavin Gulati, Sr. Adv. Mr. Avi Tandon, Adv. Ms. Meghna Tandon, AoR Mr. Mohith S. Kumar, Adv. Mr. Dushyant Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ami Tandon, Adv. Mr. Shadan Farasat, Sr. Adv. Mr. Nipun Saxena, Adv. Ms. Astha Sharma, AoR Ms. Mantika Haryani, Adv. Ms. Pratibha Yadav, Adv. Mr. Anirudh Gotety, Adv. Ms. Deepali Dabas, Adv. Ms. Aadya Pandey, Adv. Ms. Monal Prasad, Adv. Ms. Sarah Sunny, Adv. Ms. Varisha Sharma, Adv.

Table of Content
1. non-maintainability of the special leave petition is established. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. impact on financial security and operational viability of the petitioner-bank discussed. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. preliminary objection of maintainability needs evaluation before proceeding. (Para 8 , 10)
4. doctrine of merger and maintainability of review petitions clarified. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
5. finality of appeals and procedural directives regarding claims. (Para 19 , 22 , 25 , 26)

JUDGMENT :

AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH & PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, JJ.

Heard learned senior counsel Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Kavin Gulati and Mr. Shadan Farasat, for their respective parties, alongwith learned counsel assisting them.

PRELIMINARY OBJECTION:

2. At the outset, Mr. Kavin Gulati, learned senior counsel for respondent no.1, raised the issue of non-maintainability of the instant Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution of India (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Constitution’). The parties have, thus, addressed us on the same.

RESPONDENT NO.1’S CONTENTIONS:

3. Mr. Gulati, learned senior counsel, submitted that the present petition is not maintainable for the reason that the original Judgm

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top