The State Bank Of India v. Gangotri Iron And Steel Co. Ltd.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL REVIEW No.3 of 2022 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.18617 of 2021 ====================================================== 1.
The State Bank of India through the Chairman-Cum- Managing Director, State Bank of India, Corporate Centre, State Bank Bhawan, Madame Cama Road, Mumbai - 400021.
2.
The Stressed Assets Management Branch through its Asst. General Manager, having its Office at State Bank of India, 5th Floor, Zonal Office, Judges Court Road, Anta Ghat, Patna - 800001.
3.
The Aurhorised Officer, The Stressed Assets Management Branch, having its Office at State Bank of India, 5th Floor, Zonal Office, Judges Court Road, Anta Ghat, Patna - 800001.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Gangotri Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. having registered office at 307, Ashiana Tower, Exhibition Road, Patna through one of its Director, Sanjiv Kumar Choudhary.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sameer Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) (The proceedings of the Court are being conducted by Hon'ble the Chief Justice/Hon'ble Judges through Video Conferencing from their residential offices/residences. Also the Advocates and the Staffs joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residences/offices.) 20-01-2022 Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s): "For review of the judgment dated 16/12/2021 passed in CWJC no. 18617 of 2021 by Hon'ble Division bench constituting the Hon'ble Chief Justice along with the Hon'ble Mr. Sanjay Kumar and to uphold the E-Auction dated 18/10/2021 or let the DRT, Patna adjudicate the
Patna High Court C. REV. No.3 of 2022(2) dt.20-01-2022 2/2 issues in question by giving necessary direction."
The order passed is in the nature of a consent order and, as such, we see no reason sufficient enough to review the same.
Petition is dismissed.
Interlocutory application, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) K.C.Jha/DKS/- U