Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/4879/2015 on 31 December 2016
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
CWP No. CWP No. CWP No. CWP No. 4879
of 2015 of 2015 of 2015
Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: Date of decision: 31.12.2015 31.12.2015 31.12.2015 31.12.2015
Himalayan Agrigene Private Limited & another ….Petitioners
Versus H.P. State Co-operative Bank Ltd.
…Respondent _______________________________________________________
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mansoor Ahmad Mir,
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice.
The Hon’ble Mr. The Hon’ble Mr. The Hon’ble Mr. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Justice Justice Justice Sureshwar Thakur
Sureshwar Thakur, , , , Judge Judge Judge Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 _________________________________________________ For the petitioners: Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Senior Advocate
with Ms. Amrita Messey, Advocate.
For the respondent: Mr. Sunil Mohan Goel, Advocate, vice Mr. Ajay Mohan Goel, Advocate. _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________ _________________________________________________
Mansoor Ahmad Mir, Chief Justice Chief Justice Chief Justice Chief Justice (Oral)
The writ petition, on the face of it, is not maintainable.
2. At this stage, learned proxy Counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners stated at the Bar that she may be permitted to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioners to file a representation before the concerned authority and the concerned authority may be 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
High Court of H.P. 2015:HHC:14424-DB ::: Downloaded on - 03/11/2026 06:09:42 :::CIS
directed to consider the same in a time bound manner. Her statement is taken on record.
3. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioners to file a representation before the concerned authority within four weeks from today and thereafter, the concerned authority is directed to consider the same and make decision, within four weeks.
4. Pending applications stand disposed of.
(Mansoor Ahmad Mir) (Mansoor Ahmad Mir) (Mansoor Ahmad Mir) (Mansoor Ahmad Mir)
December 31, 2015 December 31, 2015 December 31, 2015 December 31, 2015
(Sureshwar Thakur
Sureshwar Thakur) ) ) ) (hemlata)
Judge. Judge. Judge. Judge.
High Court of H.P. 2015:HHC:14424-DB ::: Downloaded on - 03/11/2026 06:09:42 :::CIS