Court No. - 36 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 955 of 2010 AND WRIT - C No. 77339 of 2005 Petitioner :- Sanjay Anand Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Petitioner Counsel :- Rohit Agarwal Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Sheo Kumar Singh,J.
Hon’ble Rajesh Chandra,J.
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 77339 of 2005 (Sanjay Anand Vs. State of
U.P. and others) was filed by the petitioner making a prayer that the
recovery citation dated 7.10.2005 issued by the respondent no. 3
against the petitioner may be quashed and that the respondents may
be directed not to adopt any coercive method for the said recovery.
Writ Petition No. 955 of 2010 was filed by the petitioner Sanjay Anand
making a prayer that the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 be directed to hand
over the no dues certificate in respect of the loan account.
Since both the writ petitions relate to the same loan transaction, hence
these are being disposed of by this common order.
In brief, the facts of the case are that the petitioner Sanjay Anand took
a loan from respondent no. 4, Ghaziabad Urban Cooperative Bank Ltd.
The petitioner made part payment towards the loan but could not pay
the entire loan amount, hence a recovery citation was issued for the
recovery of Rs. 6,98,426/- as arrears of land revenue. The petitioner
then filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 77339 of 2005 for quashing the
recovery citation. This writ petition was disposed of vide order dated
20.12.2005 and interalia it was ordered that the petitioner shall deposit
the entire amount in arrears in 16 instalments and in case the
instalments are deposited in time, then the recovery charges will not
be recovered from the petitioner.
It appears from the record that since the respondent no. 4 had not
been heard while passing the aforesaid order dated 20.12.2005 , the
order was recalled vide order dated 2.3.2006. It further appears that
oblivious of the fact that order dated 20.12.2005 has been recalled on
2.3.2006, the petitioner continued and deposited the 16 instalments as
ordered on 20.12.2005. The respondent bank while accepting the
amount of instalment also did not raise any objection that the order by
which the petitioner was allowed to deposit the loan amount in 16
instalments has already been recalled vide order dated 2.3.2006.
The petitioner Sanjay Anand after depositing all the 16 instalments
approached the bank with a prayer that the no dues certificate may be
issued as the entire amount of Rs. 6,98,426/- has been paid . The
bank, however, did not pay any heed to the request of the petitioner
and informed that the petitioner has to pay interest also. It was in this
back ground that the petitioner Sanjay Anand was obliged to file Writ
Petition No. 955 of 2010.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
counsel for the bank and the learned Standing Counsel and have also
gone through the record of the case.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the
petitioner had deposited all the 16 instalments as per order dated
20.12.2005 and that he was never in the knowledge of this fact that the
said order dated 20.12.2005 has ever been recalled by the Court vide
order dated 2.3.2006. Even his counsel was not present when the
order dated 2.3.2006 was passed. His further contention is that the
respondent bank also did not inform at any point of time that the said
order has been recalled and the bank accepted the instalments as
ordered on 20.12.2005. In these circumstances, respondent bank is
not entitled to charge any interest as the entire amount was paid
under the orders of the Court.
Learned counsel for the respondent bank, on the other hand, argued
that the arrangement made under order dated 20.12.2005 came to an
end when the said order was recalled vide order dated 2.3.2006. His
contention is that the petitioner is liable to pay interest and penal
interest as was clearly cited in the recovery citation. His further
contention is that the amount of interest and penal interest upto
29.12.2009 is Rs. 3,31,548/- to w hich further interest and penal
interest upto 30.6.2010 has to be added.
However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the parties
agreed that the entire account of the petitioner may be settled if he
pays 50% of the amount towards the interest and penal interest
calculated upto 30.6.2010.
In view of the above agreement on both these petitions are finally
disposed of with the following directions:-
(a) The respondent bank shall calculate the entire amount of interest
upto 30.6.2010 as per law within two weeks from today and will inform
the petitioner..
(b) After the entire amount is calculated and informed by the Bank half
of the amount will be paid by the petitioner within six weeks from the
date information is received by the petitioner. If half of the amount is so
deposited then, as per the agreement between the parties, the
remaining amount shall not be recoverable from the petitioner.
(c) After the amount , as detailed above, is paid by the petitioner, the
respondent bank shall issue a no dues certificate to the petitioner.
Order Date :- 12.7.2010
n.u.