The court disposed of a writ petition regarding recovery proceedings. It ordered the petitioner to deposit the recovery amount in 8 quarterly installments, stayed recovery proceedings upon default-free compliance, and directed the release of attached agricultural property after the first installment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 33
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13908 of 2018
Petitioner :- Kadeer Ahamad Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suresh Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Narendra Kumar Giri
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2; and Sri N.K. Giri for the respondent no.3.
The present petition has been filed assailing the recovery citation dated 01.09.2017 whereby the petitioner has been required to appear to deposit Rs.2,35,048/- plus interest and other charges in connection with credit facility availed by the petitioner from the third respondent for agricultural purposes.
Counsel for the petitioner does not dispute the amount which is sought to be recovered from him.
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 installments. Counsel for the Bank states that the anxiety of the Bank is that the amount is recovered back.
Accordingly this petition is disposed of with the following directions:
(i) Petitioner may deposit the entire amount sought to be recovered directly in concerned Bank in 8 quarterly installments.
(ii) The first installment shall be deposited by 15.05.2018 and the rest of installments shall be deposited at intervals of three months thereafter. These deposits shall be made with the Branch of the Bank from where the loan was taken.
(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 undertakes not to challenge.
(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.
(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 already been auctioned) after deposit of first installment. However, unless the property has already been auctioned, no third property right shall be created by the petitioner in either mortagaged or hypothecated property till entire bank dues are cleared.
(vi) If the installments are deposited as per the schedule fixed in this order, the recovery of collection charges would remain in abeyance till such time the Collector takes a decision and determines the collection charges/fee payable as per the legal provisions and in the light of 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 upon which the petitioner would either deposit the same within a period of 30 days or, if not satisfied, would be at liberty to assail the same in appropriate proceedings.
Order Date :- 17.4.2018 AKShukla/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether recovery proceedings can be stayed while allowing installment payment of dues.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Maharajwa and others versus State of U.P. and othersReferred¶16
2013(1) ADJ 426 (FB)
Kadeer Ahamad
State Of U.P.
Manoj Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
