Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 16619 (GAU)

SRI SANJAY KUMAR v. STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR

WP(C)/5514/2026 · 2026-10-13

Kaushik Goswami

Writ Petition (Civil)body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010220252026 2026:GAU-AS:15623 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5668/2026 SMT CHETNA THAKUR WO SRI ARUN KUMAR, RO SHASTRI NAGAR, KULLU, HIMANCHAL PRADESH 175101, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT HOUSE NO 88P, GF, SEC 56, SUSHANT LOK 2, GURGAON 122011, HARYANA VERSUS STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH, SARB, MG ROAD, NA ALI, JORHAT 785001 2:SRI SANJAY KUMAR SO SRI YASHPAL KUMAR RO 3 4199 D PAPER MILL ROAD BRAHAMPURI SAHARANPUR 247001 UTTAR PRADESH NOW RESIDING AT H NO 110P HUDDA PLATS OPPOSITE DEVENDER VIHAR GOLF COURSE ROAD SECTOR 56 GURUGRAM HARYAN Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S DAS, Advocate for the Respondent : , Page No.# 2/3 Linked Case : WP(C)/5514/2026 SRI SANJAY KUMAR SO SRI YASHPAL SINGH RO 3 4199 D PAPER MILL ROAD BRAHMAPURI SAHARANPUR 247001 UTTAR PRADESH NOW RESIDING AT H NO 110P HUDDA PLATS OPPOSITE DEVENDER VIHAR GOLF COURSE ROAD SECTOR 56 GURUGRAM HARYANA VERSUS STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH SARB MG ROAD NA ALI JORHAT 785001 2:SMT CHETNA THAKUR WO SRI ARUN KUMAR RO SHASTRINAGAR KULLU HIMANCHAL PRADESH 175101 PRESENTLY RESIDING AT HOUSE NO 88P GF SEC 56 SUSHANT LOK 2 GURGAON 122011 HARYANA ------------ Advocate for : MR S DAS Advocate for : appearing for STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANR Page No.# 3/3 For the petitioners : Mr. Manish Shankar Srivastava, Advocate Ms. Kalpana, Advocate For the respondents : Mr. A. Khanikar, Advocate for Respondent/State Bank of India – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI 14-10-2026 (Ashutosh Kumar, C.J.) After some arguments, Mr. Manish Shankar Srivastava, learned Advocate for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw these two writ petitions with the liberty to again approach the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata for reducing the pre-deposit amount from 35% to 25% of the debts value. In view of the above, these two writ petitions stand dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as aforesaid. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant