Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 1049 (JHR)

Arjun Prasad Agarwal v. Indian Overseas Bank

2010-11-30

R.K.MERATHIA

body2010
JUDGMENT R.K. Merathia, J. 1. Heard the parties. 2. This C.M.P. Has been filed for extension of time for paying the amounts in terms of the order dated 30/08/2010. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners that out of the dues of Rs. 5,32,146.50 paise, the Petitioners deposited two installments as per the said order, but he could not deposit the 3rd and 4th installments for the reasons stated in the petition, and therefore, the time to deposit the same may be extended. Referring to Annexure C to the counter affidavit to the writ petition, he submitted that on 06/07/2010 the present outstanding on that day was shown as Rs. 5,32,146.50 paise and, accordingly, the said order was passed in the writ petition but now the bank is asking for higher amount. 3. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the bank submitted that the order dated 30/08/2010 was passed on Petitioners' readiness and willingness to pay the dues of the bank if some time was granted. Referring to Annexure A dated 1.9.2006 (to the counter affidavit filed in the writ petition) he submitted that in the letter dated 06/07/2010 it was noted that the loan account is NPA in the books of the bank from 30/06/2006 and, accordingly, the interest was not shown alongwith outstanding amount of Rs. 5,32,146.50. 4. It is clear from the order dated 30/08/2010 that the Petitioners expressed their readiness and willingness to pay the dues of the bank if some time is granted by this Court. The dues of the bank were not ascertained at the time of passing the said order. However, in view of the said letter dated 06/07/2010, order was passed directing the Petitioners to pay Rs. 5 lakhs in four installments, and thereafter, the bank was directed to supply the details of the balance amount due to the Petitioners, which, the Petitioners were directed to deposit. It was also ordered that if the Petitioners fail to comply with any part of the order, the bank may auction the property mortgaged and will debit the expenses of advertisement in the account of the Petitioner. 5. In the circumstances, I indicated that if the Petitioners are ready and willing to pay the dues of the bank as per the bank's calculation with interest till the date of payment, the time can be extended, but Mr. 5. In the circumstances, I indicated that if the Petitioners are ready and willing to pay the dues of the bank as per the bank's calculation with interest till the date of payment, the time can be extended, but Mr. Ayush Aditya, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, on instructions submitted that the Petitioners are not agreeable, and therefore, they may be allowed to withdraw this C.M.P. as well as the main writ petition. In the facts and circumstances noticed above, this C.M.P. stands dismissed as withdrawn. But Petitioners can not be allowed to withdraw the disposed of writ petition.