Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

M/S Maha Laxmi Atta Udyog vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3117 of 2019 Petitioner :- M/S Maha Laxmi Atta Udyog Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Irfan Hasan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Anadi Krishna Narayana
Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Heard Shri Irfan Hasan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Apurva Hajela, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Shri Sandeep Singh, learned counsel for the private respondents.
By means of present writ petition, petitioner is assailing the validity of order impugned dated 17.09.2018 passed by first respondent under Section 14 of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act 2002 (in brevity 'SARFAESI Act 2002').
At the very outset, Shri Sandeep Singh, Advocate as well as Shri Apurva Hajela, learned Standing Counsel have raised objection on the maintainability of the writ petition on two folds; firstly on the ground that earlier the petitioner has approached the Division Bench of this Court by preferring Writ Petition no.45492/2016 (M/s Maha Luxmi Aatta Udyog and another vs. Bank of Baroda) assailing the validity of notice under Section 13(2) and 13(4) of SARFAESI Act 2002. The aforementioned writ petition was disposed of by Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.09.2016 facilitating the petitioner to deposit the amount in installment and as such, it is sought to be contended that the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of concealment of material fact; Secondly against the order impugned, the petitioner has got efficacious alternative remedy of filing appeal before the DRAT and on this score also the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
Confronted with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner, on the basis of instructions, submits that he does not want to press the present writ petition and as such, the same may be dismissed as not pressed.
Request made is accepted.
Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed.
Order Date :- 29.1.2019 A. Pandey
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

M/S Maha Laxmi Atta Udyog vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 January, 2019
Judges
  • Mahesh Chandra Tripathi
Advocates
  • Irfan Hasan