Court No. - 36 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 44423 of 2010 Petitioner :- Halim Khan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Deepak Kumar Singh Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Anamika Singh Hon'ble Sheo Kumar Singh,J.
Hon’ble Rajesh Chandra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel who appears for the Bank and learned
Standing Counsel.
Challenge in this petition is recovery proceeding by
which a particular amount is sought to be recovered
from the petitioner. 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. Submission is
that if reasonable time is allowed to pay the amount
sought to be recovered, petitioner may be able to pay
the same and irreparable injury on account of arrest
and auction of property may be avoided.
To the aforesaid, learned counsel appearing for Bank
submits 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 future prospects
and thus if for justifiable reason the amount in terms
of the agreement has not been paid and now petitioner
has bonafide intention to pay the amount within a
reasonable time then if that liberty is given, it will
serve 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.
Thus for grant of reasonable time, if that is to advance
justice, respondents may not have any objection.
In view of aforesaid, this Court feels in the ends of
justice that amount sought to be recovered be
permitted to be deposited.
Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the
following directions :
i) Petitioner is to deposit an amount of Rs. 40,000/-
directly in the concerned bank within a period of one
month from today to show bonafide on his part.
ii) If petitioner deposits the above amount within the
time so allowed then he is permitted to deposit the
remaining amount directly in concerned Bank in
three quarterly instalments. In calculating the arrears
the amount (if any) already paid will be adjusted.
iii) The first installment may be deposited by 30th
November 2010, second instalment by 28th
February, 2011, third by 31st May, 2011. These
deposits may be made before the branch of the Bank
from where the loan was taken. In case instalments
are deposited in the Bank then only half of the
recovery charges will be recovered from the
petitioner.
iv) During period of deposit the recovery proceedings
will be kept in abeyance. In case petitioners 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.
v) Petitioner may file an application for supply of
statement of account alongwith duly stamped self
addressed envelope. In case any such application is
filed, the concerned branch of the Bank will give the
same to the petitioner after deposit of first instalment
within fifteen days.
vi) 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.
vii) 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.
viii) If any fact given from the side of the petitioners
are found to be incorrect by the bank authorities, it
will be open for them to move an application for
modification/recall of the order.
With the aforesaid direction, writ petition stands
disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.7.2010
M/A.