Bombay High Court

ASHOK NANAJI RANDHE AND OTHERSversusBANK OF BARODA THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED OFFICER AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The writ petition was dismissed because an alternate efficacious remedy existed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.

Summary

The petitioners filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging actions of Bank of Baroda and others. The Court observed that the petitioners had already filed an appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad on 16 February 2026, which constituted an alternate efficacious remedy. Consequently, the Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable. The petition was dismissed on the ground that the alternative remedy should be pursued. No substantive merits of the underlying dispute were addressed.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition is maintainable when the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy available before another forum

Subjects

writ jurisdiction
alternative remedy
Debt Recovery Tribunal
maintainability
petition dismissed

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:39444-DB
                                                                              55-WP-10477-26.odt




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             WRIT PETITION NO. 10477 OF 2026

        Ashok Nanaji Randhe and Others                             ..PETITIONERS
              VERSUS
        Bank of Baroda and Others                                  ..RESPONDENTS

                                               ....
        Mr. A.P. Kale, Advocate for Petitioners
        Mr. S.K. Tambe, Addl.G.P. for Respondent no.5 - State
                                               ....

                                          CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                                  ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
                                          DATE : 24th AUGUST, 2026

        PER COURT :

        1.         The petitioners have already availed an alternate efficacious remedy

        of filing appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad on 16 th

        February, 2026. Therefore, we are not inclined to entertain this petition.


        2.         In view of above, writ petition is dismissed.




              ( ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. )           ( NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J. )
        SSD




                                           1 / 1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…