Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(C)/3310/2023 of M/S VASCULAR DEVICES AND IMPLANTS AND ANR. Vs JAMMU AND KASHMIR BANK LIMITED AND ORS. on 4 November 2025
No. 13 Regular Cause List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR WP(C) 3310/2023 CM(7942/2023) M/S Vascular Devices and Implants and Anr …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s). Through: Mr. Aijaz A . Bhat, Advocate with Mr. Abrar H. Khan, Advocate. Vs. Jammu and Kashmir Bank
Serial No. 13
Regular Cause List
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
WP(C) 3310/2023 CM(7942/2023)
M/S Vascular Devices and
Implants and Anr
…Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s).
Through:
Mr. Aijaz A. Bhat, Advocate with
Mr. Abrar H. Khan, Advocate.
Vs.
Jammu and Kashmir Bank
Limited and Ors.
...Respondent(s).
Through:
Mr. Adil Asimi, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PARIHAR, JUDGE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
04.11.2025
1. The order dated 27th October, 2025, whereby one week’s further time was granted to the petitioner to comply with the order dated 22nd December, 2023 read with orders dated 25th March, 2025 and 16th July, 2025 making it clear that in case the needful was not done by the next date of hearing, appropriate order shall be passed, has not been complied with.
2. Today, when the case was called, learned counsel for the petitioner again made same submissions and sought further time.
3. Having regard to the consistent conduct demonstrated by the petitioner in these proceedings and the disregard shown to the interim directions passed by this court from time to time, no further indulgence is required in the matter.
4. The interim direction of protection with respect to the secured asset is vacated leaving it open to the bank to proceed with the recovery of its dues in accordance with the law.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would fairly submit that with regard to the availing of the benefit of OTS Scheme, he has already filed a petition against the bank.If that be the position, this petition for all practical purposes is rendered infructuous.
6. Dismissed as infructuous.
7. (SANJAY PARIHAR)
(SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE
JUDGE SRINAGAR 04.11.2025 <Shahid Manzoor=