Disposed

Manoj Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC17 Jun 2020WRIC/9695/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition filed by a loan defaulters seeking relief against a recovery certificate. The court granted the petitioner an opportunity to repay the outstanding amount in a staggered schedule of an initial lump sum followed by quarterly installments, with no recovery charges and abatement of proceedings for compliance.

What did the court decide?

Order to deposit Rs.50,000 within two months, followed by quarterly installments of the balance, with no recovery charges and abatement of proceedings.

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Banking and Recovery | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 48

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9695 of 2020

¶3

Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh K.S. Chaudhary Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amrish Sahai

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

It is stated that petitioner has taken loan for agriculture, but the same could not be repaid as per the terms of agreement. A recovery certificate dated 21.8.2019 for a sum of Rs.302290/- plus other charges 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 installments.

¶6

Notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 & 2 has been accepted by learned Standing Counsel, whereas Sri Amrish Sahai, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent no.3 Bank.

¶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 within the period prescribed, the respondent Bank shall provide a fresh schedule for re-payment of balance amount in four quarterly installments and the same shall be deposited by the petitioner, accordingly.

¶10

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

¶11

(iv) Till the period prescribed for depositing initial amount and thereafter the 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.

¶13

Order Date :- 17.6.2020 Ranjeet Sahu

Manoj Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Tripathi Vs Shri Radhey Shyam Tiwari and 7 Others

Dharmendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

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

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

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