Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PRAVEEN VARSHNEY versus SATE BANK OF INDIA & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Praveen Varshney v. Sate Bank Of India & Others - WRIT - C No. 12138 of 2002 [2006] RD-AH 2017 (25 January 2006)

 

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

Court No.1

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 12138 of 2002

Praveen Varshney Vs. State  Bank of India and others

Hon'ble  Yatindra Singh,J

Hon'ble  R.K.Rastogi,J

1.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           The petitioner took  a  loan from the  respondent no.1.  As the petitioner could not pay the said loan,  the  recovery proceedings have been initiated  against  him, hence the present writ petition.

2. We have heard   counsel for  the petitioner, Standing Counsel for  the respondents no. 2 and 3 and  Mr.  Satish Chaturvedi  for  respondent no. 1

3. The counsel   for the petitioner has made statement at the bar that this is the first writ petition against the recovery and this fact has also been stated in the writ petition. According to the petitioner he could not pay the loan due to the circumstances beyond his control. In view of this, it would be appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with the  following directions:

. The  petitioner may  deposit the entire arrears  in  four instalments. In  calculating the arrears the amount (if any) already paid  will be adjusted.

. The  first instalment  may be  deposited  before the end of    March, 2006 and the subsequent instalments may be deposited  after the  interval of every three months. These deposits may be made  before  respondent no.1 .

.       During  this period,  the recovery  proceedings will be kept in abeyance. In case the  petitioner defaults in depositing  the instalments within the above stipulated time, it will be  open to the respondents  to start recovery  proceedings again.

. The petitioner may file application for the  accounts  alongwith duly stamped  self-addressed  envelope. In case  any such application is filed, the same will be given to the petitioner by respondent no.1 after deposit  of first instalment. The amount  already  paid or  deposited by  the petitioner in pursuance of  the  interim order of this Court,  will be adjusted.

.      This order  will not  affect  any auction  already held. In that  event the petitioner may take appropriate  legal proceedings to set aside the auction under UPZA & LR Act  and Rules, 1952 or file a suit in accordance with  law.

.      It is clarified that this order will not be operative in case the petitioner has filed any other earlier writ petition against the recovery.

With these observations the writ petition is disposed of.

Dated: 9.1.06

MLK/


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.