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


Smt. Raisha v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. (Financial Revenue) Lkw. & Ors. - WRIT - C No. 72720 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 6524 (28 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).


Court No.1

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 72720 of 2005

Smt. Raisha  Vs.   State of U.P. and others.

Hon'ble  Yatindra Singh,J

Hon'ble  R.K.Rastogi,J

1. The petitioner took  a  loan from the  respondent no.4. As the petitioner could not pay the said loan,  the  recovery certificate dated 5.9.2005  has been issued against  her, hence the present writ petition.

2. We have heard   counsel for  the petitioner, Standing Counsel for  the respondents no. 1, 2 and 3 and  Mr. Tarun Varma    for  respondent no. 4.

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 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   Jan, 2006 and the subsequent instalments may be deposited  after the  interval of every three months. These deposits may be made  before  respondent no.4 from  where the loan was taken. In case instalments are deposited  before respondent no.4 then  the recovery charges  will not be  recovered from the petitioner.

.       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.4 after deposit  of first instalment.

.      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.




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.