Research › Search › Judgment

Meghalaya High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 37 (MEG)

Manik Dhar v. Indian Overseas Bank

2019-02-19

H.S.THANGKHIEW

body2019
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned counsels for the parties. 2. Mr. K. Paul, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to settle the matter with the respondent Bank but is prevented by the fact that he has not been furnished with the statement of accounts and the particulars of the outstanding amounts which he submits is over Rs 1 Crore, as per the Banks calculation. 3. Ms. T. Yangi, learned counsel for the respondent Bank vehemently objects to this suggestion, inasmuch as, she states that the petitioner is a willful defaulter and has no intention of settling the outstanding amount and as such prays that effective orders be passed in the matter. 4. After hearing learned counsels at some length, in the interest of justice and to give another chance to the petitioner to try to settle the amounts outstanding, the respondent Bank is directed to furnish the detailed accounts, to this Court, of his Savings, Current Accounts, Fixed Deposit if any, which are in the name of the petitioner with the respondent Bank, the amounts adjusted against over draft or the loan accounts and the outstanding amounts that is to be paid to the Bank as on today. 5. Ms. T. Yangi prays for fifteen days time to furnish the same. Prayer is allowed. 6. List this matter after fifteen days for further orders and hearing.