JUDGEMENT 1. Reg. I.A. No. 6043/2009: This is an application for condonation of delay of 442 days in filing the appeal. 2. Heard Mr. Arvind Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.- Rajesh Prasad Choudhary, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents no. 2 to 4. 3. Mr. Choudhary has no objection for condonation of delay and, accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal stands condone. I.A. No. 6043/2009 is, accordingly, disposed of. Reg. L.P.A. No. 1215/2009: 4. As we have condoned the delay, we are inclined to take up the appeal for admission. 5. Admit. 6. On consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it is finally heard. 7. In this intra-court application, assailing the order dated 24.4.2008, passed by the learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 8943/2000, whereby the learned Single Judge has concurred with the order passed by the Bank for recovery of Rs. 11,228.10 on the ground that proper procedure had been followed by the Bank for realisation of the said sum. 8. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Bank could not have realised the said sum from the appellant, who was the Manager and inasmuch as the liability on the Bank was approximately Rs. 4,800/- whereas a sum of Rs. 67,000/- has been realised from the appellant and six other employees. 9. Learned counsel for the Respondent-Bank per contra submitted that the appellant shall give No Dues Certificate to the lonees as a consequence of which the sum that was on lent to the lonees could not be recovered and further a sum of Rs. 10,000/- was imposed as costs by the consumer forum. 10. In view of the aforesaid we are of the considered opinion that the order passed by the learned Single Judge concurring with the order passed by the Bank does not warrant any interference. However, it is conceded to by Mr. Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the Bank that the aforesaid realisation of the sum of Rs. 11,228.10 from the appellant shall never be treated as a punishment and, while considering his case for promotion, the same shall not be looked into. However, it is conceded to by Mr. Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the Bank that the aforesaid realisation of the sum of Rs. 11,228.10 from the appellant shall never be treated as a punishment and, while considering his case for promotion, the same shall not be looked into. Additionally it is also accepted by the learned counsel for the bank that it shall not be incorporated in the A.C.R. on the ground of any negligence inasmuch as the said sum has been recovered in order to keep the accounts clear. 11. With the aforesaid modifications in the order of the learned Single Judge, the Letters Patent Appeal stands disposed of without any order as to costs.