← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/999/2018dismissed

M/S. Patel Mini Rice Mill, Through Its Proprietor, Satyendra Kumar Ray v. The Canara Bank, Through Its Regional Manager And ORS

2018-02-22Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

Patna High Court CWJC No.999 of 2018 dt.22-02-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.999 of 2018 =========================================================== M/s. Patel Mini Rice Mill, through its Proprietor, Satyendra Kumar Raj @ Satendra Kumar Ray, Son of late Hari Shankar Ray Resident of Village- Takiya, Barhiyabagh, Police Station- Sasaram, District- Rohtas- 821115 .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Canara Bank, through its Regional Manager, Regional Office, Lav-Kush Tower, Exhibition Road, Patna.

2. The Senior Manager, Canara Bank, , Sasaram Branch, District- Rohtas.

3. The Authorised Officer, Canara Bank, Sasaram Branch, District- Rohtas.

4. The Presiding officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal , 2nd Floor, ABF Wing, Karpuri Thakur Sadan, Ashiana Digha Road, Near Rajiv Nagar Thana , Patna800025 .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Prasad, Adv For the Respondent/s :

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 22-02-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for quashing of notice dated 26.12.2017 issued by the Authorized Officer, Canara Bank, Sasaram (respondent no. 3) for auction sale of the property of the petitioner rice mill as well as notice published in the daily Hindi newspaper 'Hindustan' dated 29.12.2017.

2. At the very outset learned counsel for the respondent-Bank states that the auction to be held on 29.01.2018 pursuant to the impugned notice of auction sale dated 26.12.2017 has failed in absence of any bidder having participated in the auction.

Patna High Court CWJC No.999 of 2018 dt.22-02-2018

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the aforesaid stand of the respondents.

4. In the above view of the matter, the present writ petition has become infructuous and accordingly stands dismissed. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/BT AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 26.02.2018 Transmission Date NA