Mr. Rajesh Agarwal vs Union Of India
2025 Latest Caselaw 2224 Tel

Telangana High Court

Mr. Rajesh Agarwal vs Union Of India on 17 February, 2025

     THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
                            AND
           THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

                    WRIT APPEAL No.340 of 2022

JUDGMENT (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul):

Sri Tarun G. Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant;

Sri B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Sri Gadi Praveen

Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for respondent

Nos.1, 2 and 6 and Smt. M. Shalini, learned Standing Counsel

for respondent Nos.4 and 5.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this writ

appeal was arising out of an interlocutory order dated

29.04.2022 passed in W.P.No.7174 of 2021. This Court, while

entertaining the present writ appeal, passed an interim order.

Relevant portion of which reads thus:

"Having regard to the above made submissions, there shall be interim suspension of the impugned order dated 29.04.2022 passed in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.7174 of 2021, and the appellant is permitted to travel to United States of America for treatment of his wife, subject to condition of the appellant furnishing security of Immovable property worth Rs.30.00 Crores to the satisfaction of the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. It is made clear that the appellant shall return back to India by 30.06.2022 without fail."

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in

obedience of this Court's order, the security of Rs.30.00 Crores

was deposited before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. The

appellant, in obedience of this Court's order, returned to India

before 30.06.2022. In the meantime, the original W.P.No.7174 of

2021 was decided and allowed on merits on 06.10.2023. Thus,

the Writ Appeal has rendered infructuous. However, since the

said security was deposited pursuant to the order of this Court,

the same may be permitted to be released.

4. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 6 did not

dispute the same.

5. However, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.4

and 5 submits that the Bank's interest may be protected and the

matter may be adjourned so that the security may not be

released. The Bank has a claim against the aforesaid amount.

6. We are not able to persuade ourselves with the aforesaid

line of argument of learned Standing Counsel for respondent

Nos.4 and 5. This Writ Appeal was arising out of an

interlocutory order which pales into insignificance in view of final

decision by allowing W.P.No.7174 of 2021. If the Bank has any

claim against the appellant, liberty is reserved to the Bank to

avail the remedy in accordance with law.

7. With aforesaid, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. No costs.

Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also

stand closed.

___________________ SUJOY PAUL, ACJ

____________________ RENUKA YARA, J

Date: 17.02.2025 Myk/Tsr