Bombay High Court

M.S. AMAR TECHNOCRAFT THR ITS PROPRIETOR MR. A.B. SHAHI AND ANOTHERversusKOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD., AHILYANAGAR

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: N B SURYAWANSHI VAISHALI PATIL JADHAV

Holding

The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn, with liberty granted to the petitioners to approach the DRAT.

Summary

The petitioners, M/s Amar Technocraft and its proprietor, filed a writ petition challenging an order of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRAT) in Securitisation Application No.36/2019, contending that the Chairperson of the DRAT was unavailable at the time of the order. They sought permission to withdraw the petition now that the Chairperson is available, so they could approach the DRAT afresh. The High Court examined whether the petition could be withdrawn and the parties allowed to approach the DRAT again. The Court granted the petitioners' request, disposing of the writ petition as withdrawn while granting them liberty to approach the DRAT. All substantive contentions raised by the petitioners were left open for future consideration before the DRAT.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition challenging a DRAT order may be withdrawn when the DRAT Chairperson becomes available, and the petitioner be permitted to approach the DRAT anew

Subjects

Debt Recovery Tribunal
Securitisation
Writ Petition
Withdrawal
Procedural Law

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:12728-DB

1 9913.2025WP.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
2 WRIT PETITION NO. 9913 OF 2025
M.s. Amar Technocraft Thr Its Proprietor Mr. A.B. Shahi and another
VERSUS
Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., Ahilyanagar
...
Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. Latange V.P.
Advocate for Respondent no.1 : Mr. Shete U.N.
...
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.
DATED : 24th MARCH, 2026.
ORDER :

. Not on board. On being mentioned taken on board.
2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner states that this petition
challenges order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal in
Securitisation Application No.36/2019, as at that point of time, Chair
Person of D.R.A.T. was not available. He submits that now the Chair
Person is available, and therefore, he may be permitted to withdraw
this petition with liberty to approach the D.A.R.T.
3. Permission is granted. Writ Petition is disposed of as
withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.
4. All the contentions are kept open.

(VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV,J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI,J.)

sga

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…