Mr. Nagesh Umesh Pai And ANR., v. Bank Of India, Saligao Branch, Thr. Its Branch Manager And 4 ORS.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO. 348 OF 2017 MR. NAGESH UMESH PAI AND ANR., ... Petitioners

Versus

BANK OF INDIA, SALIGAO BRANCH, THR. ITS BRANCH MANAGER AND 4 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. Amey Jagdish Sinai Kakodkar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. N. Vaze, Advocate for the respondent no.1. Mr. Jagannath Jayant Mulgaonkar, Advocate for the respondent nos. 2 & 3.

Mr. J. Supekar, Advocate for the respondent nos. 4 and 5. Coram:- F. M. REIS & NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ.

Date:- 13th April, 2017 P.C.

During the course of the hearing of the above petition, Mr. Mulgaonkar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 2 and 3 has raised the contention that the petitioners have an alternate remedy to challenge the impugned decision before the DRT in terms of the Securitization Act. As such, Mr. A. Kakodkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners upon instructions of the petitioner no.1 who is present in Court seeks leave to withdraw the above petition with liberty to challenge the impugned decision before the DRT at Mumbai. Hence, the petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

WP/348/2017 All contentions of both the parties are left open. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, J.

F. M. REIS, J.

at*