1 264.11 SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.264 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION (LODING) NO.778 OF 2011 Smt.Charu K.Mehta ...Applicant (Ori.Resp.No.8) Versus Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust & Anr. ...Ori.Petitioners And Union Bank of India & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Pranav Sampat with Mr.Rizvi Naser i/b Thakore Jariwala & Associates in support of Notice of Motion. Mr.Jay Kansara i/b Vidhi Partners for Petitioners. Mr.Nainesh Amin for Respondent Nos.1 & 2. Mr.Kunal Vajani with Ms.Pranaya Goyal i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co. for Respondent No.11. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED:- MAY 2, 2011. P.C. 1. Not on Board. Upon mentioning taken on Board. 2. The applicants in this Motion, if so advised, may take recourse to substantive remedy as may be permissible in law. For, the pending Writ 2 264.11 Petition is for the limited purpose filed on the basis of apprehension that the bankers would freeze the account of the Trust. In this Writ Petition, the Bank has already made statement before the Court that they have not passed any formal order of freezing the account as such but only made inquiries on the basis of the information given by the Income-tax Department telephonically. The relief in the Petition, to that extent, is worked out on the statement made by the Bank through Counsel. 3. For the aforesaid reason, the question of entertaining relief as claimed in the Motion does not arise. The applicant is free to file appropriate proceedings, which will be decided on its own merits. 4. Motion disposed of accordingly. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)