Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

CANARA BANKversusPREMKUMAR DEVANDAS KISHNANI AND ANR

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn.

Summary

Canara Bank, a secured creditor, filed a writ petition challenging a Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) order that granted a waiver of pre‑deposit. The bank subsequently withdrew its appeal before the DRAT. Consequently, the bank sought to withdraw the writ petition itself. The High Court considered the request and, noting that the underlying dispute was no longer pending, disposed of the writ petition as withdrawn. All pending applications, if any, were also dismissed.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ petition can be withdrawn when the underlying appeal before the DRAT has been withdrawn

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • withdrawal
  • DRAT
  • secured creditor
  • pre‑deposit waiver

Judgment

                                                                                           69_WP_16151_25.doc



                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                               WRIT PETITION NO. 16151 OF 2025

                             Canara Bank                                  …                Petitioner
                                  vs.
                             Premkumar Devandas Kishnani (since deceased)
                             Through legal heirs and another              …                Respondents

                             Ms. Somesh Talla, i/b. Ms. Vaishali Bhilare for petitioner.
                             Mr. Indrajeet Hingare for respondent No.2.

                                                                CORAM :       MANISH PITALE &
                                                                              SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ
                                                                DATE      :   07th OCTOBER, 2026
                             P.C. :


                             .        The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner – bank
                             (secured creditor) submits that the writ petition is rendered
                             infructuous, for the reason that the subject matter of challenge was
                             an order passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) in
                             an application for waiver of pre-deposit. Subsequently, the petitioner
                             withdrew the appeal itself in the DRAT.


                             2.       In that light, the petitioner – bank desires to withdraw the writ
                             petition.


                             3.       In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of as
                             withdrawn. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.




                             (SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.)                             (MANISH PITALE, J.)



          Digitally signed
Priya
PRIYA Kambli
          by PRIYA
          KAMBLI
KAMBLI Date:
       2026.10.07
          15:00:49 +0530
                                                                                                          1/1


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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