Bombay High Court
Manisha Nimesh Mehta vs Board Of Directors And 12 Ors on 13 July, 2023
Author: M.M. Sathaye
Bench: B. P. Colabawalla, M.M. Sathaye
2023:BHC-OS:6654-DB
24 wpl 28510-
22.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 28510 OF 2022
Manisha Nimesh Mehta and Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
Board of Directors and Ors. .. Respondents
Mr.Mathews Nedumpara a/w Hemali Kurte i/b
Nedumpara and Nedumpara Assocaites, Advocates for
the Petitioner.
Mr. Harjot Singh a/w Raval Shah and Co., Advocates for
Respondent No.1.
Mr. Himanshu Takke, AGP for the Respondent/State.
CORAM : B. P. COLABAWALLA &
M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.
DATE : JULY 13, 2023
P. C.
1. The above writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
a) to declare that every court or tribunal or an administrative Authority vested of judicial or quashi judicial may even ministerial function is invested of such inherent, auxillary and incidental powers without which the function invested in it by law cannot be discharged and the same is known by the maxim " Quando lex aliquid Page 1 of 3 JULY 13, 2023 Sneha Chavan ::: Uploaded on - 15/07/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/07/2023 05:31:58 ::: 24 wpl 28510-
22.doc alicui concedit, conceditur et id sine qua res ipsa esse non potest" and further that in as much as the order dated 21.01.2022 under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act, 2002, which the Respondent No. 4 has obtained is still born, non existent, fraudulent, void ab initio, vitiated by misrepresentation and the Magistrate Respondent No. 6 is duty bound to recall his order dated 21.01.2022 and where he has failed and hesitated to do so in the instant case a writ in the nature of 'Mandamus' will lie, obligating him to do so;
b) In furtherance of relief as prayed at 'a' above and without prejudice to the same to issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other writ or order quashing and setting aside the order dated 21.01.2022.
2. Mr. Nedumpara, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners fairly stated that this very petitioner has already filed before this Court, a writ petition challenging the entire action taken by the Bank under the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002 inter alia on the ground that the account of the Petitioner was wrongly classified as NPA without following the procedure, as set out in notification dated 29.05.2015 issued under the MSMED Act, 2006. He submitted that this larger issue is pending before this Court and the writ petition filed by present petitioner, namely, writ petition (L) No. 35792 of 2022 Page 2 of 3 JULY 13, 2023 Sneha Chavan ::: Uploaded on - 15/07/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/07/2023 05:31:58 ::: 24 wpl 28510-
22.doc is already tagged with the other matters raising the same issue.
He, therefore, fairly stated that the present writ petition would not survive and sought leave to withdraw the same.
3. In these circumstances, the above writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs.
4. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order.
[ M.M. SATHAYE, J.] [ B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.] Page 3 of 3 JULY 13, 2023 Sneha Chavan ::: Uploaded on - 15/07/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 16/07/2023 05:31:58 :::