KALPANA SURESH RAMCHANDANI vs CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND ORS Advocate - SUNIL KADAM — WP/4723/2026

Case under Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act Section NA. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

CNR: HCBM010054502026

Next Hearing

12th June 2026

Filing Number

WP/3169/2026

Filing Date

02-02-2026

Registration No

WP/4723/2026

Registration Date

09-04-2026

Judge

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHREERAM VINAYAK SHIRSAT

Coram

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHREERAM VINAYAK SHIRSAT

Bench Type

Division

Category

MERCANTILE LAWS COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS , BANKS ( 28 )

Sub-Category

DRT Matters ( 103 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Acts & Sections

RECOVERY OF DEBTS DUE TO BANKS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS ACT Section NA

Petitioner(s)

KALPANA SURESH RAMCHANDANI

Adv. Swapan Samdani

Respondent(s)

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA AND ORS Advocate - SUNIL KADAM

GAUTAM GHOSH

ARUN SHIVNATH AMLE

RAMESH RAMCHANDRA KALYANKAR

RASIK RAMESH KALYANKAR

RACHNA RAMESH KALYANKAR

R R KALYANKAR CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHREERAM VINAYAK SHIRSAT

16-04-2026

FRESH ADMISSION

12-06-2026

FRESH ADMISSION

23-04-2026

FRESH ADMISSION

Orders

23-04-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHREERAM VINAYAK SHIRSAT

Case Summary: WP/4723/2026 Outcome: Case adjourned for four weeks. The Bombay High Court expressed prima facie opinion that the writ petitions may not be maintainable, suggesting the petitioner should pursue remedies under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Petitioner's counsel sought time to respond to this jurisdictional challenge. Matter listed for further hearing on 12th June 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP/4723/2026 Outcome: Case adjourned for four weeks. The Bombay High Court expressed prima facie opinion that the writ petitions may not be maintainable, suggesting the petitioner should pursue remedies under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Petitioner's counsel sought time to respond to this jurisdictional challenge. Matter listed for further hearing on 12th June 2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case