AUTHUM INVESTMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS — CWP/14939/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226/227. Disposed: --DISPOSED OF on 14th May 2026.
CNR: PHHC010809012026
e-Filing Number
11-05-2026
Filing Number
CWP/29338/2026
Filing Date
11-May-2026
Registration No
CWP/14939/2026
Registration Date
12-May-2026
Judge
Mr. Justice Vikas Suri , Mr. Justice Suvir Sehgal
Coram
Mr. Justice Vikas Suri , Mr. Justice Suvir Sehgal
Category
31.11 - FINANCIAL CORPORATION UOI D.B. ( 558 )
Judicial Branch
WRITS -I BRANCH
Decision Date
14-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
--DISPOSED OF
Last updated 01-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.AUTHUM INVESTMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE LTD
Adv. NAKUL SHARMA
-
2.State of Haryana and others
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
-
2.State of Haryana and others
-
3.District Magistrate
-
4.Naib Tehsildar
-
5.Senior Superintendent of Police
-
6.Malik Poulty
-
7.Bablu Malik
-
8.Sultan Ram
-
9.Rinku
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-May-2026
Mr. Justice Vikas Suri,mr. Justice Suvir SehgalView PDF
Case Summary: CWP/14939/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana directed the competent authority to comply with the District Magistrate Panipat's December 8, 2025 order under the SARFAESI Act within 60 days. Authum Investment and Infrastructure Ltd sought mandamus relief for delivery of physical possession of a secured asset, which had not been handed over despite five months having elapsed since the order was passed. The court disposed of the petition with directions to execute the order unless there was a legal impediment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. CWP/14939/2026
Case Summary: CWP/14939/2026 The High Court of Punjab and Haryana directed the competent authority to comply with the District Magistrate Panipat's December 8, 2025 order under the SARFAESI Act within 60 days. Authum Investment and Infrastructure Ltd sought mandamus relief for delivery of physical possession of a secured asset, which had not been handed over despite five months having elapsed since the order was passed. The court disposed of the petition with directions to execute the order unless there was a legal impediment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts