MS YOGESHA AND YAARS LIQUORS vs CANARA BANK Advocate - ASHISH JOSHI — WPMS/1712/2026
Case under Under Article 226 of the Constituion of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 15th June 2026.
CNR: UKHC010095432026
Filing Number
WPMS/4977/2026
Filing Date
01-Jun-2026
Registration No
WPMS/1712/2026
Registration Date
01-Jun-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )
Sub-Category
MISC MATTERS ( 47 )
Judicial Branch
ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)
Decision Date
15-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 16-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.MS YOGESHA AND YAARS LIQUORS
Adv. DUSHYANT MAINALI
-
2.KARAN DURGAPAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.CANARA BANK Advocate - ASHISH JOSHI
-
2.DIVISIONAL MANAGER
Adv. ASHISH JOSHI
-
3.BRANCH MANAGER
Adv. ASHISH JOSHI
-
4.RESERVE BANK OF INDIA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
15-Jun-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar TiwariView PDF
The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by MS Yogesha and Yaars Liquors against Canara Bank's classification of their Rs. 5.75 crore working capital loan account as "fraud." The court found that the petitioners were provided adequate opportunity to respond to show cause notices on 19.09.2025 and 30.10.2025 but failed to submit replies, and therefore declined to interfere with the bank's decision, citing lack of expertise in banking matters. However, the court permitted the petitioners to raise their submissions before the Reserve Bank of India. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
03-Jun-2026
Fresh Cases As Defective -236
Registrar (Judicial)
-
01-Jun-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WPMS/1712/2026
The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by MS Yogesha and Yaars Liquors against Canara Bank's classification of their Rs. 5.75 crore working capital loan account as "fraud." The court found that the petitioners were provided adequate opportunity to respond to show cause notices on 19.09.2025 and 30.10.2025 but failed to submit replies, and therefore declined to interfere with the bank's decision, citing lack of expertise in banking matters. However, the court permitted the petitioners to raise their submissions before the Reserve Bank of India. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts