Madhu Babbar & ORS v. Dena Bank & ORS

$~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6100/2017 and CMs 25312-13/2017 MADHU BABBAR & ORS ..... Petitioners Through : Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari with Mr. Vipin Singh, Advocates versus DENA BANK & ORS ..... Respondents Through : Mr. Arun Aggarwal, Advocate for R-1. Mr. Kazran Khanna with Ms. Asmita Kumar, Advocate for R-3 & 7.

Mr. O.P. Gaggar, Advocate for R-4.

Mr. V.K. Gupta, Advocate for R-6.

Mr. V.K. Gupta, Advocate for R-8.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

O R D E R

% 20.07.2017 1.

Arguments have been addressed by Mr. Bhandari, learned counsel for the petitioners on the legality of the order dated 2.6.2017 passed by the learned DRAT in SA 122/2016 filed by the respondent No.1/Bank, whereunder it has assailed an order dated 14.2.2016 passed by the DRT in a petition filed by the petitioners directing the Bank to maintain status quo regarding sale of four properties stated to be mortgaged by the respondent No.8 in favour of the Bank.

2.

We have expressed our reservations in interference in the impugned order.

W.P.(C) 6100/2017 Page 1 of 2

3.

At this stage, counsel for the petitioners states that he may be permitted to withdraw the present petition, while reserving the right of his clients to approach the learned DRAT/DRT for seeking their remedies in accordance with law.

4.

Leave, as prayed for, is granted. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, along with the pending applications. HIMA KOHLI, J DEEPA SHARMA, J JULY 20, 2017 sk W.P.(C) 6100/2017 Page 2 of 2