Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Surendra Prasad vs The Authorized Officer -Cum -Chief ... on 12 September, 2014

Author: Mihir Kumar Jha

Bench: Mihir Kumar Jha

         Patna High Court CWJC No.15751 of 2014 (2) dt.12-09-2014




                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15751 of 2014
                     ======================================================
                     Surendra Prasad, son of late Ram Chandra Prasad, resident of Mohalla
                     Salempur, P.O. + P.S. Barh, District Patna             .... .... Petitioner
                                                        Versus
                     1. The Authorized officer -cum -chief Manager Punjab National Bank,
                        Branch Barh, P.O./P.S./Town Barh, District Patna 803213
                     2. The Zonal Manager, Punjab National Bank, Zonal Office, Chanakya
                        Tower, R.Block, Birchand Patel Marg, Patna 800001
                     3. The Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, 34, Bank road, Opp.
                        New Police Line, Lodipur, Patna 800001          .... .... Respondents
                     ======================================================
                     Appearance :
                     For the Petitioner/s     :   Mr. Dr. Binay Kumar Singh
                     For the Respondent/s       : Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan
                     ======================================================
                     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA
                     ORAL ORDER
2     12-09-2014

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Having regard to the fact that the petitioner is already before the Debts Recovery Tribunal against the same impugned order which has been assailed in this writ application, it has to be necessarily held that this writ application is both premature and ill- advised.

The only submission that the Tribunal did not give stay to the petitioner, as prayed for by him, can be no ground for moving this Court in writ jurisdiction, inasmuch as any order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal is also appealable before the appellate Tribunal.

That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and ill-advised and is, accordingly, dismissed.

surendra/-                                                          (Mihir Kumar Jha, J)
 U
 Patna High Court CWJC No.15751 of 2014 (2) dt.12-09-2014