M/S D. CORPATE HOTEL BHADOHI AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
CRLP/4084/2025 · 2025-03-03
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Prashant Kumar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 24954 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 24954 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30618-DB Court No. - 42 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 4084 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/S D. Corpate Hotel Bhadohi And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vinod Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State respondents.
2. The instant writ petition is preferred seeking direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos.2 & 3 to enforce the fundamental self right of the petitioners about self restoration of property of plot no.671, under the name and style of M/s D. Corporate Hotel situated at Rajpura Town Area, District Bhadohi after removing the illegal encroachment of respondent nos.4 & 5 forthwith.
3. Shri G.P. Singh, learned AGA-I on the strength of instructions dated 01.03.2025 sent by the Sub-Inspector, P.S. Bhadohi, District Bhadohi states that the petitioner had taken loan from the Central Bank of India, later on, the same was declared NPA, hence, the auction proceeding was initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and the property was put to auction successfully. The auction was concluded in favour of one Pankaj Baranwal being highest bidder, who is in possession over the property in question. He further states that the instant proceeding is misuse of process as the petitioner is having remedy under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
4. Considering the factual situation, we are not inclined to accord any reprieve to the petitioner.
5. Confronted with the situation, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the instant writ petition may be dismissed as not pressed, however, leave may be accorded to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for appropriate relief in accordance with law.
6. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. Suffice to indicate, it is open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for appropriate relief in accordance with law. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 S.P. (Prashant Kumar, J.) (M. C. Tripathi, J.) Digitally signed by :- SANJAY PURI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad