Disposed

Mahendra Pal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC23 Mar 2018WRIC/10720/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition concerning a bank loan recovery dispute, directing the petitioner to repay the amount in eight monthly installments while halting recovery proceedings and releasing attached property upon compliance.

What did the court decide?

Directed repayment in eight installments; stayed recovery proceedings; ordered release of attached property.

Mahendra Pal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 10720 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Mahendra Pal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suneel Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Krishna Mohan Asthana

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Surat Ram (Maurya),J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents and Sri Krishna Mohan Asthana counsel for the respondent-bank.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the amount which is sought to be recovered from him.

¶7

Admittedly, the petitioner took loan from the respondent-Bank concerned out of which petitioner has not paid substantial amount. Petitioner submits that he is ready to deposit whole of the amount in easy installment. Learned counsel for the Bank states that the anxiety of the Bank is that the amount should be recovered back.

¶8

Accordingly this petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶9

(i) Petitioner may deposit the entire amount sought to be recovered directly in concerned Bank in eight equal six monthly installments.

¶10

(ii) The first installment shall be deposited by 23.4.2018 and the rest of installments shall be deposited at interval of six months thereafter. These deposits shall be made before the Branch of the Bank from where the loan was taken.

¶11

(iii) Recovery proceedings during this period will be kept in abeyance. In case petitioner commits default in depositing any of the installments within the above stipulated time, it will be open to the respondents to start the recovery proceedings again by taking coercive process to which the petitioner undertake not to challenge.

¶12

(iv) Petitioner may file an application for supply of statement of account along with the duly stamped self addressed envelope. In case any such application is filed, the concerned branch of the Bank will give the same to the petitioner after deposit of the first installment within fifteen days and in calculating the arrears, the amount (if any) already paid will be adjusted.

¶13

(v) Property (agricultural land/tractor) belonging to the petitioner, if attached, in connection with recovery proceedings, will be released by the concerned Tehsil authority (unless it has been auctioned) after deposit of first installment and further as soon as the first installment is paid, the property (agricultural land/tractor) of the petitioner shall also be released.

¶14

(vi) In case all the installments are deposited as per the schedule fixed in this order, the recovery of the collection charges would remain in abeyance till such time the Collector decides the application that may be filed by the petitioner for determining collection charges/fee as per the legal provisions and also taking into consideration the Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of Maharajwa and others versus State of U.P. and others, reported in 2013(1) ADJ 426 (FB) . Upon determination of collection charges/fee the Collector will communicate the same to the petitioner and upon communication of the same it would be open to the petitioner to either deposit the same within a period of 30 days or if not satisfied with the same may assail the order of the Collector in appropriate proceedings.

¶15

Order Date :- 23.3.2018 Rahul /-

Mahendra Pal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Pal v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahavir Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rakesh Kumar Dhuria Vs General Manager (Personal and Administration) Allahabad Bank and 02 Others

Mohammad Aziz Vs State of U.P. and 03 Others

M/S Krbl Limited through Its Chairman and Managing Director Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Krishna Gopal Vs H.D.F.C Bank Ltd. and Another

Santosh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others