Allowed

Vijay Pratap Singh v. State of U P and 2 Others

Allahabad HC25 Mar 2019WRIC/5118/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed to quash a recovery notice for an agricultural loan default. Setting aside the notice, the Court directed the petitioner to repay the dues in installments and mandated the bank to provide a clear, layman-friendly statement of account to facilitate repayment.

What did the court decide?

Recovery notice quashed; petitioner directed to pay dues in seven installments starting 25.4.2019; bank ordered to provide a simplified account statement.

Vijay Pratap Singh Vs State of U P and 2… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 28

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5118 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Vijay Pratap Singh Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Bhishm Pal Singh,Anoop Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Krishna Mohan Asthana

¶4

Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Bhishm Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.M.Asthana, learned counsel for the respondent bank.

¶6

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being finally disposed of at this stage without calling for a counter affidavit.

¶7

By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing recovery notice dated 27.8.2018 for Rs.9,04,025/- plus other charges.

¶8

The petitioner had taken a loan of Rs.7,20,000/- for agricultural purpose. It is admitted to the petitioner that a default has been committed by the petitioner in making timely repayments of that loan. Consequently, recovery proceedings have been initiated against him.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to deposit the entire recovery amount within the time fixed by this Court.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing for the bank fairly states that the bank is interested in realizing the entire amount alongwith interest. If the petitioner deposits the amount within the time allowed by this Court, no further action shall be taken against the petitioner by the bank.

¶11

On the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶12

i) The petitioner shall deposit the entire amount due to the bank in seven installments beginning from 25.4.2019.

¶13

ii) By way of first installment, the petitioner shall deposit Rs.1,80,000/- on or before the date 25.4.2019.

¶14

(iii) On depositing the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,80,000/-, the respondent bank shall provide a statement of account to the

¶15

petitioner within two weeks thereafter disclosing the exact amount disbursed by the bank as loan; exact amount/s repaid by the petitioner together with dates of deposit; rate of interest and amount/s of interest charged by the bank. Such statement be expressed in such terms/language as may be easy to comprehend even by a lay-man such as the petitioner.

¶16

(iv) The bank shall in the statement so supplied, itself calculate & indicate the amount/s of each installment together with the date of payments due.

¶17

(v) Thus, the balance amount so indicated by the bank shall be deposited by the petitioner through the remaining six equal quarterly installments from 25.7.2019 onwards.

¶18

(vi) If the entire amount is deposited by the petitioner as directed above, no recovery charge shall be realized from the petitioner.

¶19

(vii) In case of default of the conditions as mentioned above, the present order shall stand automatically vacated and recovery proceedings shall revive from that stage.

¶20

Order Date :- 25.3.2019 AKJ

Vijay Pratap Singh v. State of U P and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Pratap Singh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Singh Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Vishun Pal Singh Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Abhinandan Prajapati Vs Assistant Registrar Firms Societies and Chits and 3 Others

Pushpendra Kumar Vs State of U P and 2 Others

Km. Divyani Jayraj Vs State Bank of India and 2 Others

Devanki Nandan Vs State of U P and 3 Others