Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Ram Das & Another v. Allahabad Bank Branch Hargarh & Ors. - WRIT - C No. 23965 of 2004 [2004] RD-AH 290 (2 July 2004)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No.4

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 23965 of 2004

Ram Das and another        Vs. Allahabad Bank , Branch Hargarh, District

                                                 Mirzapur and others

Hon. S.P. Mehrotra, J.

      The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, interalia, praying for quashing the  Citation  to appear dated 14.6.2004 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition)  issued by the respondent no.3 against the petitioners .

It appears that  the petitioners took loan from  the respondent no.1(Allahabad Bank, Branch Hargarh District Mirzapur) on 31.8.1999 for purchasing a Tractor. The loan was repayable in instalments as per the  schedule.

It further appears that on 11.12.1999 , Kisan Credit Card was issued  to the petitioners  to the extent of Rs. 20,000/- by the respondent no.1.

It further appears that the petitioners defaulted in payment of instalments as per the schedule, and in consequence, the recovery proceedings have been initiated against the petitioners.

Photostat copy of the Recovery Certificate issued by the respondent no.1 has been filed as Annexure no. 1 to the writ petition . Photostat copy of the Citation to appear, as mentioned above,has been filed as Annexure no. 2 to the writ petition.

It further appears that in connection with the said recovery , the Tractor of the petitioners has been seized on 29.6.2004 as per the averments made in paragraph no. 6 of the writ petition .

I have heard Shri K.S.Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel appearing  for the respondent Nos. 2,3 and 4, and Mrs. Sufia Sapa, holding brief for Sri  Sanjiv Singh , learned   counsel for  the respondent no.1.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I am not satisfied that there is any illegality or infirmity in the recovery proceedings being taken against the petitioners.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submits that the petitioners are ready to pay the amount sought to be recovered as per the impugned  Citation (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) if reasonable time is granted to the petitioner.

Mrs. Sufia Sapa, holding brief for Sri Sanjeev Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 has no objection to reasonable time being granted to the petitioners for paying the amount sought to be recovered as per the impugned Citation.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, I am of the opinion that it will be in the interest of justice that the writ petition be disposed of with the following directions:

The recovery proceedings against the petitioners may be stayed for a period of four months from today, and if during this period, the petitioner deposits 30% of the amount sought to be recovered as per the impugned Citation, the stay would continue for a further period of Eight months within which period, the petitioners shall deposit the remaining amount with interest up-to-date in two four  monthly equal instalments.

In the event of failure in making deposit of any of the instalments, as aforesaid, the recovery proceedings may be resumed and be taken to their logical end in accordance with law.

In case, the entire amount due against the petitioners is deposited, the recovery proceedings initiated pursuant to the impugned  Citation, may be struck-off.

In case, any amount has already been deposited by the petitioners towards the amount sought to be recovered as per the impugned  Citation, credit will be given to the petitioners for such amount.

The Tractor of the petitioners will be released after payment of first instalment by the petitioners, as aforesaid. However, the said release of the Tractor will be subject to the compliance of the conditions mentioned above by the petitioners.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the above observations/directions.

Copy of this order may be given to the learned counsel for the parties on payment of usual copying charges within 24 hours.



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.