Ashima Limited v. Hdfc Bank Limited And 4 Others

3669-15-WP-l=.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 3669 OF 2015 M/s. Ashima Ltd.

.. Petitioners v/s.

HDFC Bank Ltd. & Ors.

.. Respondents Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Sr. Counsel a/w Swanand Ganoo, Nishit Dhruva, Prakash Shinde i/b MDP & Partners for the petitioners Mr. Ismile Nasikwala, Ms. Tanaaz Padania i/b Kanga & Co. for the respondent no.1 Ms. Usha Srivastav i/b Consulta Juris for the respondent no.2 CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & B.P. COLABAWALLA, J.J.

DATED : 29th JANUARY, 2016.

P.C.

1.

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged the orders dated 3rd December, 2015 and 11th December, 2015 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) as also an interim order dated 17th December, 2015 passed by the Debt Recovery (Appellate) Tribunal, Mumbai (DRAT).

2.

We are informed that the DRAT has finally heard the petitioners' appeals from the two orders dated 3rd December, 2015 and 11th December, 2015 along with the Miscellaneous Application filed by Uday S. Jagtap

3669-15-WP-l=.doc the respondents being Miscellaneous Application No.1020 of 2015 on 27th January, 2016. We are also informed that upon conclusion of the hearing, the DRAT passed an order in open Court. However, we are further informed that a copy of the same has not been made available as it is not finalised as yet and it is expected to be available shortly. In view of the peculiar facts of this case, the petitioners are at liberty to apply to the DRAT for the operative part of the order passed on 27th January, 2016.

3.

In any view the fact is that the petitioners' grievance in this petition has been redressed inasmuch as the DRAT has heard them on their appeals. Therefore, this petition does not survive. 4.

Accordingly, this Petition is now dismissed as infructuous. (B.P. COLABAWALLA, J.) (M.S. SANKLECHA, J.) Uday S. Jagtap