Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SATISH KUMAR SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' PRINCIPAL SECY. & ORS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Satish Kumar Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru' Principal Secy. & Ors. - WRIT - C No. 61265 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 2919 (15 September 2005)

 

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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon. S. K. Singh, J.

Challenge in this petition is the recovery certificate by which an amount of Rs. 4,02,968/- plus other charges is sought to be recovered.

Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned Advocate who represents the respondent bank. Loan was taken on 3.8.2002 to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/- which was payable within seven years i.e. up to 2009.  Submission is that due to unavoidable circumstances as stated in the writ petition petitioner could not deposit the instalments in time. Submission is that if reasonable time is allowed to pay the defaulted amount which may be said to be in balance up to period of September, 2005 and for the remaining amount if petitioner is permitted to proceed with the regular deposit per bank schedule, petitioner may be saved of irreparable injury and at the same time bank may also get its amount.

In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the bank submits that the loan was advanced to the petitioner with the intention that petitioner may get his  means improved and he may be placed in a better position and the bank is interested only in getting its money back.

In view of the aforesaid keeping in mind the plight of the agriculturist, with a view to do justice between the parties, this Court , proposes to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions :

i) Petitioner is directed to deposit the entire outstanding amount which may be said to be due up to the period 30.9.2005 by 30.9.2005.

ii) If the amount is deposited as indicated above then the remaining amount will be deposited according to the bank schedule.

iii) It is made clear that if the amount is deposited in the aforesaid manner respondent will not proceed to recover the amount by taking any coercive process.

iv) In the event of default in depositing any instalment in future then the interim protection given by this Court shall cease to operate and it will be open for the respondent bank to recover the amount by taking any coercive process.

v) If any fact given by the petitioner on the basis of which this order is being passed is found to be false by the respondent bank, it will be open for the bank officials to move appropriate application for recall/modification of the order.  

The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.

15.9.2005.

SKS

61265/2005


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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