AJAY CHANDRAKANT MADANE AND ANR vs BANK OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS — WP/6378/2026
Case under Securitisation & Reconstruction of Finiancial Assets Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Disposed off as Withdrawn on 06th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM010229012026
Filing Number
WP/13353/2026
Filing Date
04-May-2026
Registration No
WP/6378/2026
Registration Date
05-May-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
06-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed off as Withdrawn
Last updated 12-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.AJAY CHANDRAKANT MADANE AND ANR
Adv. Rajesh Darvesh
-
2.SUCHETA AJAY MADAN
-
3.PRATIK AJAY MADANE
Respondent(s)
-
1.BANK OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
-
2.CHIEF MANAGER ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH NAVI MUMBAI
-
3.PUSHPA KAMBLE
-
4.VISHAL BENGANI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-May-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale,hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak ShirsatView PDF
The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Ajay Chandrakant Madane and others against Bank of Maharashtra after the petitioners' counsel sought withdrawal on instructions. The court clarified that its dismissal order would not prevent the bank from taking lawful action to recover physical possession of the secured asset under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-May-2026
For Circulation
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale , Hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak Shirsat
-
04-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP/6378/2026
The Bombay High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Ajay Chandrakant Madane and others against Bank of Maharashtra after the petitioners' counsel sought withdrawal on instructions. The court clarified that its dismissal order would not prevent the bank from taking lawful action to recover physical possession of the secured asset under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts