M/s. Forum Diamonds & Ors. v. Bank of Baroda & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The petition is disposed of accordingly, leaving the parties to bear
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. On the contrary it is contended by the respondents that the petitioners should invoke appropriate remedy and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court may not exercise the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Without prejudice to the…
Judgment
Mr. S.M.A. Kazmi, Senior Counsel, with Ms. Snehal M. Paranjpe, instructed by B.P. Pandey, for the petitioners. Mr. Rishab Shah for the respondents. J.P. DEVADHAR, J. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DATE: DECEMBER 06, 2007. P.C. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
#2. It is contended before us that the respondent-Bank, after dealing with the objections vide their letter dated 13th March, 2007, had abandoned the proceedings and thereafter had taken proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, which are admittedly pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal even as of today. The enforcement of the notice after such a long delay is stated to be arbitrary and without any basis. -2-
#3. On the contrary it is contended by the respondents that the petitioners should invoke appropriate remedy and in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court may not exercise the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, we direct that the impugned notice shall not be executed for a period of two weeks. The petitioner is at liberty to take such steps as are permissible to him in accordance with law. The petition is disposed of accordingly, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. CHIEF JUSTICE J.P. DEVADHAR, J.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The petition is disposed of accordingly, leaving the parties to bear
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 06 Dec 2007. The bench was P DEVADHAR, IEF P DEVADHAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.