High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Mahendra Kumar And Another v. State Bank Of India And Others - WRIT - C No. 1281 of 2006  RD-AH 675 (10 January 2006)
Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.
Hon'ble Dilip Gupta, J.
The petitioners claim themselves to be the tenant of the property in dispute. It has been alleged in the petition that the Landlord respondent no.2 had taken some loan from the State Bank of India respondent no.1 and since the said loan remained unpaid, the matter was taken before the Debt Recovery Tribunal in which proceedings were initiated for recovery of certain amount and the recovery certificate was also issued. The sale proclamation was issued in November, 2005. The apprehension of the petitioners is that the Bank would evict them from the premises on the basis of the sale proclamation.
Shri Vipin Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 has stated that the petitioners will be evicted in accordance with law and not otherwise and therefore the petition should not be entertained as it is based on mere apprehension.
In view of the aforesaid statement made by Shri Sinha, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1, we are of the opinion that the apprehension expressed by the petitioners in the present petition is misconceived. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.