2 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3559 of 2025 & Ors. v. State of U.P. and 8 others) and Writ C No. 9723 & Ors.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- SARFAESI Act, 2002 s. 14
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of. (Om Prakash Shukla, J.) (Rajan Roy, J.) Order Date :- 16.4.2025 -Piyush- PIYUSH YADAV PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench
Judgment
Petitioner :- H.D.F.C. Bank Limited Vibhuti Khand Gomti Nagar Lko Thru. Authorized Officer Mr. Arpit Shukla Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) U.P. Lko. U.P. And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mahima Dixit, Brajesh Kumar Deo Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J. Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.
Heard.
Let the application of the petitioner filed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 be considered and decided in terms of our judgments dated 25.10.2024 and 14.11.2024 rendered in Writ C No. 8867 of 2024 (Bank of Baroda Vs. State of U.P. and 8 others) and Writ C No. 9723 of 2024 (Pnb Housing Finance Ltd. Lko. Thru. Authorised Representative Mr. Surya Prakash Mishra vs. State of U.P. and others) at the earliest unless there is any legal impediment in which case it shall be mentioned in the order sheet. If nothing happens within six weeks, the petitioner can approach this Court again.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition is disposed of. (Om Prakash Shukla, J.) (Rajan Roy, J.) Order Date :- 16.4.2025 -Piyush- PIYUSH YADAV PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
SARFAESI Act, 2002 — s. 14.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 16 Apr 2025.
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.