SHAMSHAD HUSSAIN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case is listed peremptorily yet the learned counsel for the petitioner is not present. However, Sri Chandra Shekhar Mishra holding brief of Sri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4 is present.

(2.) The instant petition has been successively adjourned either at the request or on the absence of the counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) As we have already passed an order on 5/10/2020 on the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent Bank that the property in question has already been sold out in pursuance of the proceedings drawn under the SARFAESI Act, there is no justifiable reason to keep the matter pending. Even otherwise the petitioner has an alternative remedy to approach before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Sec. 17 of the Act to rake up his grievance.?