← Library
Bombay High CourtCAZ/629/2012admittedallwdgrantedrule absolute

Shishak Sahakari Bank Ltd., Through Its Chief Executive Officer, Nagpur v. Shri Ranjitsingh S/O Chandansingh Chandel Dead, Thr. L.Rs. Gurmitsingh S/O Ranjitsingh Chandel And

2015-01-05Hon'Ble Shri Justice B.R. Gavai,Hon'Ble Mrs. Justice Mridula R. Bhatkar3 pages

05012015cazno.629.2012 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Civil Application (Z) No. 629 of 2012 in L.P.A. No./------/2012 Shishak Sahkari Bank Ltd. vs. Shri Ranjitsingh s/o Chandansingh Chandel and others.

Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders.

Orders.

Mr. N.G.Jetha, Adv. for the petitioner/ applicant.

Mr. Sahu, Adv. h/f Mr. M.P.Khajanchi, Adv.

for R-4 Mr. D.P.Thakare, AGP for R- 5 and 6.

CORAM: B.R.GAVAI & MRS. MRIDULA R. BHATKAR,JJ DATE : 5.1.2015 For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed. Delay is condoned.

Letters Patent Appeal No./-------/2012 in W.P.No. 2517 of 2007.

By consent the appeal is taken up for admission. This appeal challenges the order dated 26 th February, 2007, passed by the learned Single Judge in two Writ Petitions filed one by the present appellant and the other

05012015cazno.629.2012 2 by the respondents 1 to 4 i.e. the borrowers of the present appellant.

Perusal of the impugned order would reveal that the learned Single Judge, on consensus of the Bank as well as the borrowers, has found that the amount arrived at by the Divisional Joint Registrar was not correctly arrived at and as such has remanded back the matter to the learned Divisional Joint Registrar for deciding the revision. Therefore, we see no error in the impugned order warranting interference. Hence, the appeal is rejected.

JUDGE JUDGE patle

05012015cazno.629.2012 3