M/S HOTEL VENICE vs THE SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY CUM FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER CORPORATION,PUNJAB AND OTHERS Advocate - A.G. PUNJAB — CWP/19484/2022
Case under Constitution of India Section 1. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 11th May 2026.
CNR: PHHC010948732022
Filing Number
CWP/38039/2022
Filing Date
26-Aug-2022
Registration No
CWP/19484/2022
Registration Date
31-Aug-2022
Judge
Mr. Justice Vikas Suri , Mr. Justice Suvir Sehgal
Coram
Mr. Justice Vikas Suri , Mr. Justice Suvir Sehgal
Bench Type
Single
Category
55 - COOPERATIVE ACT MATTERS ( 697 )
Judicial Branch
WRITS -I BRANCH
Decision Date
11-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
--DISMISSED
Last updated 01-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.M/S HOTEL VENICE
Adv. TUSHAR SHARMA I
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY CUM FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER CORPORATION,PUNJAB AND OTHERS Advocate - A.G. PUNJAB
-
2.REGISTRAR COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES,PUNJAB
-
3.THE HINDU COOPERATIVE BANK LTD
-
4.SEEMA SHARMA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
11-May-2026
Mr. Justice Vikas Suri,mr. Justice Suvir SehgalView PDF
Case Summary: CWP/19484/2022 - M/S Hotel Venice The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the writ petition filed by Hotel Venice against the Special Chief Secretary-cum-Financial Commissioner, Corporation Punjab and The Hindu Cooperative Bank Ltd as infructuous. The bank's counsel submitted that Hotel Venice's One Time Settlement offer had been accepted, full repayment made, and the loan account closed, which the petitioner's counsel did not dispute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
01-Sep-2022
Other
-
26-Aug-2022
Case filed
Registration No. CWP/19484/2022
Case Summary: CWP/19484/2022 - M/S Hotel Venice The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the writ petition filed by Hotel Venice against the Special Chief Secretary-cum-Financial Commissioner, Corporation Punjab and The Hindu Cooperative Bank Ltd as infructuous. The bank's counsel submitted that Hotel Venice's One Time Settlement offer had been accepted, full repayment made, and the loan account closed, which the petitioner's counsel did not dispute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts