HARI DATTATRAY SHINDE vs CANARA BANK AND ANR — WP/6795/2026

Case under Securitisation & Reconstruction of Finiancial Assets Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 11th June 2026.

CNR: HCBM010225302026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

WP/13138/2026

Filing Date

30-04-2026

Registration No

WP/6795/2026

Registration Date

22-05-2026

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

MATTERS RELATING TO SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS ( 10 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

11th June 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Acts & Sections

Securitisation & Reconstruction of Finiancial Assets Act Section NA

Petitioner(s)

HARI DATTATRAY SHINDE

Adv. Adv v j ghorpade

Respondent(s)

CANARA BANK AND ANR

AUTHORIZED OFFICER

Hearing History

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

11-06-2026

FRESH ADMISSION

Orders

11-06-2026
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHREERAM VINAYAK SHIRSAT

The Bombay High Court dismissed Hari Dattatray Shinde's writ petition challenging a demand notice issued by Canara Bank under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The court held that statutory remedies are available under the Securitisation Act, making the writ petition not maintainable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court dismissed Hari Dattatray Shinde's writ petition challenging a demand notice issued by Canara Bank under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The court held that statutory remedies are available under the Securitisation Act, making the writ petition not maintainable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case