Atul Agnihotri v. Union Bank Of India & ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-5035-2017 Date of decision: 14.03.2017 Atul Agnihotri ..... Petitioner

Versus

Union Bank of India and others ..... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN PRESENT: Mr. Mukul Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia seeking a direction to the respondents to restore the symbolic possession of the property to the petitioner.

2.

After arguing for sometime, when the Bench was not agreeing with the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel submitted that he may be allowed to withdraw the present writ petition, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

3.

Dismissed as withdrawn. It shall, however, be open to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedy, if any, as may be available to him, in accordance with law.

( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE March 14, 2017 ( RAMENDRA JAIN ) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No Rishu Kataria 2017.03.15 11:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document