Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

ASHOK SHANKAR PATILversusINDIAN BANK LTD AND ANR

Holding

The petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution as the notices have been taken to their logical end.

Summary

The petitioner challenged sale notices issued in 2024 under the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 and a physical possession notice dated 17 February 2026. No counsel appeared for either party. The court observed that the record showed the notices had been taken to their logical end and that no interim orders had been made. Because the petitioner failed to prosecute the petition, the court found no basis to entertain the challenge. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for non‑prosecution.

Issues considered

  • Whether the sale notices issued under the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 are valid and enforceable
  • Whether the petitioner's failure to prosecute warrants dismissal of the writ petition

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • sale notice
  • possession notice
  • security interest
  • non‑prosecution
  • dismissal
  • high court

Judgment

2026:BHC-KOL:9779-DB

                                                                        15-WP-1189-2026(C).doc


                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                     WRIT PETITION NO. 1189 OF 2026

               Ashok Shankar Patil                                         ...Petitioner
                         Versus
               Indian Bank Ltd And Another                                 ...Respondents
                                                ——————
               None for the Petitioner.
               None for the Respondents.
                                                ——————
                                                CORAM :         SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH &
                                                                NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.
                                                DATE        :   OCTOBER 08, 2026.
               P. C. :

               1.        The Petitioner challenges the sale notices of the year 2024 issued

               under the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 and the physical

               possession notice dated 17th February, 2026.

               2.        None appears on behalf of the Petitioner.

               3.        The record does not indicate that the Petition has been circulated

               and there are no interim orders which are passed. As the sale notices

               are of the year 2024 and the physical possession notice is of February,

               2026, it appears that the notices have been taken to its logical end.

               4.        Petition stands dismissed for non-prosecution.




                [NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.]                       [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]


               Jamadar - SL                        1 of 1


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.