Disposed

Prabhjot Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Allahabad HC16 Jun 2020WRIC/9520/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petitioner who failed to repay a bank loan sought stay of recovery proceedings. The court recorded willingness to pay and directed the bank to accept a deposit and offer a fresh repayment schedule before resuming recovery.

What did the court decide?

Direction to deposit Rs. 50,000 within two months; fresh repayment schedule in four quarterly installments; recovery proceedings stayed pending compliance.

Prabhjot Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others — Banking and Recovery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 48

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9520 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Prabhjot Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nitin Mukesh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Manoj Nigam

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent State, and Sri Manoj Nigam, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Bank.

¶6

It is stated that petitioner has taken loan for the purpose of Dairy Unit, but the same could not be repaid as per the terms of agreement. A citation for a sum of Rs. 2,52,450/- has been issued against the petitioner. This writ petition has been filed with the averment that petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the amount, in case the petitioner is permitted to do so in easy instalments.

¶7

Having regard to the fact that petitioner has offered to pay the entire amount due against him, in my view, the ends of justice require that the petitioner be granted opportunity to deposit the entire outstanding amount due against him in the following manner:

¶8

(i) Petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- within a period of two months from today with the respondent Bank.

¶9

(ii) In case the amount, as indicated above, is deposited by the period prescribed, the respondent Bank shall provide a fresh schedule for repayment of balance amount in four quarterly installments and the same shall be deposited by the petitioner, accordingly. Statement of account shall also be furnished to the petitioner.

¶10

(iii) No recovery charges shall be recovered from the petitioner by the respondent authorities.

¶11

(iv) Till the period prescribed for depositing a sum of Rs.50,000/- and thereafter during the period of deposit of installments, the recovery proceedings will be kept in abeyance. In case the petitioner defaults in depositing initial amount or thereafter installments within the stipulated period, it will be open for the respondents to start recovery proceedings against the petitioner.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶13

Order Date :- 16.6.2020

¶14

Anil

Prabhjot Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhjot Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 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

Smt. Chandrakala Tripathi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Jugendra Kumar Mourya Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ashok Kumar Tripathi Vs Shri Radhey Shyam Tiwari and 7 Others

Dharmendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Awadhesh Chandra Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others