Bank Of Baroda v. Union Of India And 3 ORS.

907-wp-395-2008.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.395 OF 2008 Bank of Baroda

...Petitioner

vs.

Union of India and Others

...Respondents

Mr. Rajeev Waglay i/b. Mr. Dinesh Parmar, for the Petitioner Mr. Suresh Kumar, for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR CORAM :

K.R. SHRIRAM & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ.

VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR Date: 2022.02.22 15:40:25 +0530 DATE :

FEBRUARY 18, 2022 P.C.:

.

Though it is not recorded, Mr. Waglay in fairness states that on last date, i.e., 4th February 2022 the Court had directed Petitioner to bring the money into the Court. Mr. Waglay states that oral direction has not been complied with and according to him no money is payable.

2.

Court's directions have not been complied with. Hence, Petition dismissed.

At this stage, Mr. Waglay was also informed that if the head of petitioner bank would come and give an undertaking to comply with court's directions by Tuesday, i.e., 22nd February 2022, we would recall the order of dismissal and hear Mr. Waglay in detail. At 2.30 p.m. Mr. Waglay came back and informed the court that nobody from petitioner has come to the court and it is very Vishal Parekar 1/2

907-wp-395-2008.doc long drawn procedure in petitioner's organization. Mr. Waglay was informed that a gentleman has to only come and give an undertaking to deposit and Mr. Waglay was informed once again that court's directions have to be strictly complied with, to which there is no satisfactory response.

(N. J. JAMADAR, J.) (K. R. SHRIRAM, J.) Vishal Parekar 2/2