Petitioner sought direction to stop oil supply cut-off by respondent bank due to overdraft court held purely private transaction not amenable to judicial intervention and directed parties to negotiate.
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. - 39
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 40127 of 2018
Petitioner :- M/S Shukla Filling Station Respondent :- Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohit Kumar,Prabhooti Kant Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard Sri Mohit Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Kishor Manohar Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent no.2-Bank and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.3. No one appears on behalf of the respondent no.1-Indian Oil Corporation.
The petitioner in the writ petition is seeking a direction to the respondent no.1-Indian Oil Corporation not to stop the supply of oil in view of the letter dated 21.03.2017.
Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the petitioner is running a petrol pump, for which he was granted cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.80,00,000/- in 2015 which was subsequently enhanced to one crore. According to the petitioner fixed deposit of Rs.25,00,000/- was taken by the Bank from him as per requirement of the condition of grant of the cash credit.
According to the petitioner so far he has paid Rs.12,38,047/- in the assessment year 2017-18 and the total outstanding against him as on 02.12.2018 is Rs.90,10,609.63/-. Since the petitioner has already overdrawn his limit and has not been able to pay back the amount the supply of oil has been stopped by the impugned order/letter dated 21.03.2017.
The petitioner's grievance is that he will pay back the overdrawn amount from his monthly sales. He also submits that the fixed deposit of 25,00,000/- which has been taken out from the Bank may be taken by the Bank which would help to reduce the overdrawn amount.
In our opinion, this is a matter which may be negotiated by the petitioner with the Respondent-Bank and in this purely private transactional matter the Court can not intervene.
We therefore dispose of this writ petition with a direction that in
case the petitioner approaches the respondent no.2, Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Motilal Nehru Medical College Branch, Allahabad with his proposal within 15 days from today alongwith the certified copy of this order the respondent no.2 shall consider the same and intimate the petitioner within three months thereafter.
Order Date :- 10.12.2018 N Tiwari
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court can intervene in a purely private transactional matter between a petitioner and a bank regarding the supply of oil stopped due to overdraft.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction from the Court to compel the Bank to resume supply of oil.
M/S Shukla Filling Station
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
State Bank of India
Other
B. Amit Sthalekar
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
