MOHAMMAD FAROOQ RATHER v. CANARA BANK LIMITED AND ORS.
WP(C)/1835/2024 · 2025-06-04
Sanjay Parihar, Sanjeev Kumar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8670 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 8670 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Serial No.09 REGULAR LIST
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
WP (C) No. 1835/2024 MOHAMMAD FAROOQ RATHER …Petitioner/Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Shuja-ul-Haq, Advocate Vs.
CANARA BANK LTD. AND ORS ...Respondent(s) Through: None
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
ORDE R 04.06.2025
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that his proposal for One Time Settlement (OTS) has been accepted by the Bank in principle, and the matter has been sent to the Competent Authority for approval.
It is further submitted that, in view of the aforesaid development, the petitioner does not wish to press the present petition. His statement is taken on record.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed, with liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again in case OTS fails.
Till the OTS is considered and a final decision in the matter is taken by the Bank, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.
(SANJAY PARIHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR)
JUDGE
JUDGE
SRINAGAR: 04.06.2025
“ARIF” Arif Hameed I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 05.06.2025