← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/362/2015withdrawn

Rakesh Ranjan v. The Authorised Officer United Bank Of India And ORS

2015-01-09Mr. Justice Mihir Kumar Jha2 pages

Patna High Court CWJC No.362 of 2015 (3) dt.09-01-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.362 of 2015 ====================================================== Rakesh Ranjan s/o Benimadhav Prasad @ Beni Prasad Madhav, resident of New colony, Chitragupta Nagar, P.S. Agamkuan, District Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.The Authorised officer United Bank of India, Abhay Bhawan, 2nd Floor, Fraser Road, Patna-800001.

2.The Branch Manager, United Bank of India, Rajendra Path Branch, Patna800001. 3.M/s Vaishnavi Enterprises through its proprietor Bikram Kumar son of Late Jay Chandra Jha, resident of Insurance Colony, P.S. Agankuan, District Patna.

4.Bikram Kumar son of Late Jay Chandra Jha, resident of Insurance Coloy, P.S. Agankuan, District Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shambhu Nath, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binod Bihari Sinha, Adv ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT 09-01-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties as with regard to the following relief:- "To quash the E-auction sale notice dated 10.12.2014 issued under signature of Respondent no. 1 as contained in Ref. No. RO/PAT/RECOVERY/SARFASI/1258/2014 dated 10.12.2014 and paper cutting of E-auction notice dated 07.12.2014 published in news paper "Hindustan Times" so far it relates to the property of petitioner, Annexure-1 series to the writ petition."

After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application in order to enable the petitioner to move before the Debt Recovery Tribunal for redressal of the grievance raised herein.

Patna High Court CWJC No.362 of 2015 (3) dt.09-01-2015 In the considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner should have done this earlier. Any way it is better late than never.

That being so, this application is permitted to be withdrawn with the aforementioned liberty.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Ranjan/- U