Bombay High Court
IndiaversusState of Maharashtra
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The writ petition is disposed as there are no remaining matters for the court to consider.
Summary
The Court Commissioner reported compliance with the directions dated 12.08.2026, which was confirmed by the petitioner bank's counsel. No further issues remained in the writ petition. Respondent No.6 and 7 informed the court that they have filed a securitisation application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, which the court noted would be decided on its own merits. The court ordered that the petition be disposed of, with any pending applications also disposed. The petitioner was directed to pay the Court Commissioner's charges within a week.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition remains pending after compliance with the Court Commissioner's directions
- Whether the court should entertain the securitisation application filed before the DRT
Subjects
- writ petition
- court commissioner
- compliance
- securitisation
- Debts Recovery Tribunal
- disposal
Judgment
25_WP2327_26.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2327 OF 2026
Union Bank of India … Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra and others … Respondents
Ms. Priyam Amin a/w. Mr. N. Amin (through VC) i/b. N. N. Amin & Co. for
Petitioner.
Adv. Willson Gaikwad, Court Commissioner.
Mr. Vivek Phadke (through VC) for Respondent Nos.6 and 7.
CORAM : MANISH PITALE &
SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.
DATE : AUGUST 28, 2026
P.C. :
. The learned Court Commissioner has submitted a written report
stating that the directions contained in the order dated 12.08.2026 have
been complied with. The report is taken on record.
2. This is further confirmed by Ms. Amin, learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner bank (secured creditor). Hence, nothing more survives
in this petition.
3. At this stage, Mr. Phadke, learned counsel for respondent Nos.6
and 7 submits that they have filed a securitisation application before the
Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT). He submits that this Court may observe
that the securitisation application may be decided on its own merits by
the DRT.
4. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of. Pending
applications, if any, stand disposed of.
MINAL Digitally signed by
MINAL SANDIP
SANDIP PARAB
Date: 2026.08.28
PARAB 17:31:34 +0530
1/2
25_WP2327_26.doc
5. Needless to say, the securitisation application filed by respondent
Nos.6 and 7 before the DRT shall be decided on its own merits
expeditiously.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner bank submits on
instructions that the charges of the learned Court Commissioner shall be
paid within a week from today.
(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.)
Minal Parab
2/2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.