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 Prasad v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 61783 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 3308 (21 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).


Hon'ble S.K. Singh, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel who appears for the Bank/Samiti and learned Standing Counsel.

The counsel for the petitioner has made statement at the bar that this is the first writ petition against the recovery proceeding and this fact has also been stated in the writ petition. According to the petitioner he could not pay the loan amount due to unavoidable circumstances as stated in the writ petition.

To the aforesaid, learned counsel appearing for Bank/Samiti also has no objection. Learned counsel submits that although in some of the cases it has been said that against the recovery proceedings unless some illegality is pointed out the court may not interfere but at the same time submission is that intention of the respondent bank has been never to cause any irreparable injury to the loanee rather the loan amount was advanced with the purpose to improve the petitioner's prospects and thus if for justifiable reason the amount in terms of the agreement has not been paid but now petitioner has bonafide intention to pay the amount within a reasonable time then if that liberty is given, it will save the interest of both sides i.e. petitioner may be saved from the riggers of coercive process i.e. arrest, auction of the properties and at the same time respondent bank will get its full amount with interest.  

In view of aforesaid, this Court feels in the ends of justice that amount sought to be recovered be permitted to be deposited in the following manner, which will protect loanee from depriving of immovable/movable  properties causing irreparable  loss to the family which is to occur on account of coercive process and at the same time, concerned Bank/Samiti will also get its amount.

At this stage without challenging correctness of amount sought to be recovered a prayer has been made that if amount sought to be recovered is permitted to be deposited in easy instalments, deposit of entire amount can be made.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the following directions

i) Petitioner may deposit the entire amount sought to be recovered directly in concerned Bank/Samiti in five equal instalments  In calculating the arrears the amount (if any) already paid will be adjusted.

ii) The first instalment may be deposited by  30th November, 2005, second instalment by 28th February, 2006, third instalment by 31st May, 2006, fourth by 31st August,  2006 and fifth by 30th November, 2006. These deposits may be made before the branch of the Bank/Samiti from where the loan was taken. In case instalments are deposited in the Bank/Samiti then the recovery charges will not be recovered from the petitioner.

iii) During  period of deposit  the recovery proceedings will be kept in abeyance. In case petitioner defaults in depositing any of the instalments within the above stipulated time, it will be open to the respondents to start recovery proceedings again by taking coercive process at once to which the petitioner undertakes not to challenge.

iv) Petitioners may file an application for supply of statement of  account along with duly stamped self addressed envelope. In case any such application is filed, the concerned branch of the Bank/Samiti may give the same to the petitioner after deposit of first instalment.

v) This order will not affect any auction if it has already taken place. In that event the petitioner may take appropriate legal proceedings to set aside the auction under U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act and Rules ,1952 or file a suit in accordance with law.

vi) It is clarified that this order will not be operative and will not come in way of recovery process in any manner, if any other writ petition has been filed before this Court against the recovery proceeding for the loan amount.

vii) Property (agricultural land/tractor) belonging to the petitioner ,if attached will be released by the concerned Tahsil authority (unless it has been auctioned) after deposit of first instalment.

viii) If any fact given from the side of the petitioner is found to be incorrect by the bank authorities, it will be open for them to move an application for modification/recall of  the order.





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.