M/S. PRISHIJA ENERGY PRIVATE LTD. vs SARASWAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. Advocate - V DESHPANDE AND COMPANY — WP/6095/2026
Case under Securitisation & Reconstruction of Finiancial Assets Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 07th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM010204852026
Filing Number
WP/11933/2026
Filing Date
22-04-2026
Registration No
WP/6095/2026
Registration Date
30-04-2026
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE FARHAN PARVEZ DUBASH
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE FARHAN PARVEZ DUBASH
Bench Type
Division
Category
MERCANTILE LAWS COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS , BANKS ( 28 )
Sub-Category
MATTERS RELATING TO SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS ( 10 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
07th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
M/S. PRISHIJA ENERGY PRIVATE LTD.
Adv. NITIN PADMAKAR DESHPANDE
JAYESH BHALCHANDRA KAJREKAR
Respondent(s)
SARASWAT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. Advocate - V DESHPANDE AND COMPANY
RECOVERY DEPARTMENT PUNE
Adv. V DESHPANDE AND COMPANY
THE COLLECTOR PUNE
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE FARHAN PARVEZ DUBASH
FRESH ADMISSION
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | FRESH ADMISSION |
Orders
Case Summary: WP/6095/2026 The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Prishija Energy Private Limited and Jayesh Bhalchandra Kajrekar challenging a Competent Magistrate's order under the Securitisation Act, 2002. The court held that since borrowers have a statutory remedy available under Section 17 of the Securitisation Act to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), the High Court should not entertain the writ petition. The court emphasized that despite Supreme Court precedent, High Courts continue to exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 while ignoring available statutory remedies, and dismissed the petition while permitting petitioners to pursue their statutory remedy before the DRT. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: WP/6095/2026 The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Prishija Energy Private Limited and Jayesh Bhalchandra Kajrekar challenging a Competent Magistrate's order under the Securitisation Act, 2002. The court held that since borrowers have a statutory remedy available under Section 17 of the Securitisation Act to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), the High Court should not entertain the writ petition. The court emphasized that despite Supreme Court precedent, High Courts continue to exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 while ignoring available statutory remedies, and dismissed the petition while permitting petitioners to pursue their statutory remedy before the DRT. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts