Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 2145 (ALL)

Harpal Singh v. State of U. P.

2016-06-06

V.K.SHUKLA, YASHWANT VARMA

body2016
JUDGMENT Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Lavlesh Mishra, Advocate for respondent-Bank. 2. Petitioner Harpal Singh has been provided loan facility upto Rs. 60000/- from the respondent bank in the year 2003. 3. On the matter being taken up today, this much fact has been accepted that the amount in question can be recovered and in view of this, it has been contended that as the loan in question was under Dairy Scheme, liberal view be taken in the matter by allowing facility of installments so that the amount in question be deposited. 4. Counsel for the bank contended that anxiety of the bank is to get its amount back and the bank has no objection if the amount is paid in installments and in case, such directives are issued in this direction. 5. At this stage without challenging correctness of amount sought to be recovered as prayer has been made that if amount sought to be recovered is permitted to be deposited in easy instalments deposit of entire amount alongwith interest due till date can be made. 6. Accordingly we proceed to issue the following directions: (i) Petitioner may deposit the entire amount sought to be recovered directly in concerned Bank in ten equal instalments. In calculating the arrears the amount (if any) already paid will be adjusted. (ii) The first instalment may be deposited within three months from today, and rest of instalments be deposited at the interval of three months. 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 half of the recovery charges only be recovered from the petitioner. (iii) During this period the recovery proceedings will be kept in abeyance and no coercive measures be taken against the petitioner. In case petitioner 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 to which the petitioner undertakes not to challenge. (iv) Petitioner may file an application for supply of statement of account. 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 thereafter. (v) This order will not affect any auction if it has already taken place. (iv) Petitioner may file an application for supply of statement of account. 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 thereafter. (v) 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. (vi) It is clarified that this order will 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. (vii) Property belonging to the petitioner, if attached in connection with recovery proceedings, will be released by the concerned Tahsil authority (unless it has been auctioned) after deposit of first instalment and further moment first instalment is paid the applicant shall also be released. (viii) if any fact given from the side of the petitioner is found to be incorrect by bank authorities, it will be open for them to move an application for modification/recall of the order. With the aforesaid writ petition stands disposed of.