903-WP-4881-2024.DOC Chitra Sonawane. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4881 OF 2024 Markand Navnitlal Adhikari …Petitioner. Versus Canara Bank Limited & Anr. …Respondents. WITH WRIT PETITION NO.5158 of 2024 Krishna Showbiz Services Private Limited & Anr. .....Petitioners. Versus Canara Bank Ltd Arm Branch-I, Mumbai & Anr. .....Respondents Mr Ashish S. Kamat, Senior Advocate alongwith Mr Ansh Agal & Ms Aditi Pareek, i/by Jain Law Partners LLP for Petitioners. Mr Rishab Shah, a/w Mr Gajendra A. Rajput for Canara Bank. CORAM: SUMAN SHYAM & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ. DATED: 2nd JULY 2026. Order (Per Advait M. Sethna):- 1. These Petitions involving similar issues/reliefs, at the request of parties, are disposed of by this Common Order. 2. The Petitions are filed primarily assailing the Order dated 10th September 2024, passed by the Identification Committee of PALLAVI MAHENDRA WARGAONKAR Digitally signed by PALLAVI MAHENDRA WARGAONKAR Date: 2026.07.06 15:49:00 +0530 903-WP-4881-2024.DOC Respondent No.1/Bank, declaring the Petitioners as a ‘Wilful Defaulter’ (‘Impugned Order’ for short). 3. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 4. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, with the consent of the parties. 5. At the outset, Mr. Ashish Kamat, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners would invite the attention of this Court to an Order dated 9th October 2024 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the present proceedings. Vide such Order, this Court was of a prima facie view that non-furnishing of the Order of the Identification Committee to the Petitioner, is contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in State Bank of India Vs. M/s Jah Developers Pvt Ltd1. 6. Mr Kamat would further submit that by the Order of 9th October 2024 (supra), this Court, by way of ad-interim relief directed that the Respondent No.1/Bank shall not act in furtherance of Impugned Order dated 10th September 2024 passed by the Identification Committee. Mr. Shah, learned Counsel for Respondent No.1/Bank does not dispute the above. 7. In the aforementioned backdrop, the parties are now at ad idem to approach the Review Committee to redress its grievances as envisaged under the Master Circular of the RBI-the second Respondent. 1 (2019)6 SCC 787. 903-WP-4881-2024.DOC 8. Considering the above, the following order, in our opinion shall meet the ends of justice :- ORDER (a) The Petitioners shall approach the Review Committee constituted under the Master Circular of the RBI-the second Respondent. They would furnish their representations in writing along with the supporting material on the issue of declaration of the Petitioners as a ‘Wilful Defaulter’. (b) The Review Committee shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the Petitioners. Thereafter, a reasoned Order will be passed which will be communicated to the parties by the said Review Committee. (c) The Review Committee shall complete the above exercise as expeditiously as possible, preferably within the period of eight weeks from the date of the Petitioners approaching the Review Committee, as noted (supra). (d) Until such Order is passed by the Review Committee of the Canara Bank-the First Respondent shall not report the classification of the Petitioners as ‘Wilful Defaulter’ based on the Impugned Order of the Identification Committee dated 10th September 2024, to the credit information companies, including CIBIL, or other credit registries and to also refrain from taking any precipitative adverse action, in the interregnum, against the Petitioners. 903-WP-4881-2024.DOC (e) In the event the Review Committee decides against the Petitioners, it shall be open to the Petitioners to adopt such appropriate legal remedies as available in law. To facilitate such course, this Court, in exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, deems it fit and proper to direct that such adverse Order, if any, of the Reveiw Committee, shall not be acted upon for a period of two weeks from the date of such Order. (f) It is clarified that we have not delved into the merits of the rival contentions, which are left open for the parties to be urged before Review Committee, to be decided on its own merits and in accordance with law. (g) For the above reasons, the ad-interim order of this Court dated 9th October 2024, stands modified accordingly. 9. The Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No order as to costs. 10. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this Order. (ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.) (SUMAN SHYAM, J.)