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


Narendra Singh v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. & Others - WRIT - C No. 62648 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 3381 (22 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. S. K. Singh, J.

Challenge in this writ petition is the recovery certificate dated 25.8.2005 by which an amount of Rs. 2,75,097 + Rs. 1,26,013/- (Total Rs. 4,01,110/-) plus other charges is sought to be recovered.

Submission is that petitioner took two loans on 8.2.2003 to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/- for tractor and Rs. 1,00,000/- as crop loan  which were  payable in half yearly instalments of ten years and the entire amount was payable by 2013. Submission is that petitioner by now has deposited an amount of Rs. 69,000/- and thus small amount can be said to be in default for which petitioner was arrested on 17.9.2005 and still is in custody. Submission is that if petitioner is released from civil prison and  allowed  time to make the defaulted amount and thereafter if he is permitted to deposit the remaining amount per schedule of the bank petitioner may be saved of the irreparable injury and the bank may also be able to get its amount as agreed.

In view of the aforesaid learned counsel for the  respondent bank submits that bank's intention is to get its money and not to cause irreparable injury to the petitioner and in fact loan was advanced  to improve the means of the petitioner and to place him  in a better position. Submission is that if the petitioner is bonafide on his part to pay the loan amount then slight indulgence may be given but that liberty may not be misused by the petitioner and thus this care is to be taken.

In view of the aforesaid in order to test the bonafide of the petitioner this petition is disposed of by giving following directions :

1. As the petitioner is said to have been arrested on 17.9.2005, on deposit of an amount of Rs. 30,000/-, he may be released forthwith.

2. Petitioner is directed to deposit the entire amount which may be said to be payable by him up to the period of September, 2005 per instalment of the bank, by 18.10.2005 directly in the respondent bank.

3. If the aforesaid amount is deposited the petitioner may be permitted to deposit the remaining amount per schedule of the bank.

4. 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.

5. 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.

6. 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.  

With the aforesaid direction writ petition stands disposed of. Certified copy of order may be given today on payment of charges.





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.