Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BRAHMA SWAROOP versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Brahma Swaroop v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 71650 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 6118 (22 November 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.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing of recovery notice dated 25.8.2005 passed by the respondent no. 3.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the bank and learned State Counsel.

There is no dispute about the fact that petitioner earlier came to this Court against  the recovery notice/proceeding pursuant to the citation as there was default in payment of amount upon which this Court by order dated 9.6.2005 disposed of the writ petition on the undertaking given by the petitioner to pay the amount within the time so allowed. It appears that petitioner did not pay the amount inspite of the assurance given to this Court and thus he again came to this Court by moving an application for grant of time which was allowed by this Court on 9.9.2005. There is no dispute about the fact that petitioner had defaulted and he wants further time. So far the prayer for grant of further time is concerned that may be justified or not but that may be concern of the court who disposed of the writ petition by providing time schedule but certainly time cannot be extended by filing the second writ petition. Thus this Court is of the considered view that this is second writ petition on the same cause of action i.e. recovery proceedings in respect of the loan which was taken by the petitioner and, therefore, in law this writ petition is not maintainable and is not to be entertained thus deserves rejection straightaway.

For the reasons recorded above this writ petition fails and is dismissed.

22.11.2005

SKS

71650/2005


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.