Disposed

Anil Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2022WRIC/33281/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court considered a challenge to a recovery citation regarding a cash credit facility. Held that the loan was not an agricultural loan. Granted one-month time to deposit Rs. 5 lacs and further installments, prohibiting further coercive measures during this period.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted one month to deposit Rs. 5 lacs and subsequent quarterly installments; no further coercive measures.

Anil Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Banking and Recovery | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 39

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 33281 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Anil Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhishek Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Krishna Mohan Asthana

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Vipin Chandra Dixit,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Abhishek Trivedi learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri K.M Asthana learned counsel for the respondent bank.

¶6

The recovery citation is being challenged on the ground that the cash credit facilities granted to the petitioners on 6.3.2019 to the tune of Rs.10 lacs was not an agricultural loan nor it was sanctioned for agricultural purpose. The statement in para-'6' of the writ petition is that the petitioners have availed the credit facility for purchase of house in favour of the petitioner no.1.

¶7

Sri K.M. Asthana learned counsel for the respondent bank has disputed the said submission with the copy of the statement of account appended as Annexure-'2' to the writ petition which categorically records that the loan account was for General and Agri Advances. The statement in para-'6' of the writ petition that the cash credit facility availed by the petitioners has been utilised for the purchase of house would not make it a housing loan.

¶8

The challenge to the recovery citation on the ground that the commercial loan in the shape of housing loan cannot be transacted by the bank in the ordinary course of its business and cannot be recovered as arrears of land revenue under U.P Revenue Code, 2006, therefore, is liable to be turned down.

¶9

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to repay the entire dues as on 5.9.2022 i.e. Rs.13,57,411/- in case, some breathing time is provided to them.

¶10

Sri K.M. Ashthana learned counsel for the respondent bank could not raise any plausible objection to the prayer of the petitioners.

¶11

We, therefore, provided that the petitioners shall deposit Rs.5 lacs within a period of one month from today.

¶12

On the said deposit, no further coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioners.

¶13

The remaining amount shall be deposited in three quarterly installments. The last installment shall be paid with up to date interest.

¶14

In case of any default on the part of the petitioners, the respondent bank shall proceed in accordance with law.

¶15

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 23.11.2022 Harshita

¶17

Digitally signed by HARSHITA Date: 2022.11.25 16:34:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anil Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 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

Mahesh Chandra Sahu and 9 Others Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Smt. Brij Rani and Another Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Indra Devi Vs Union of India and 3 Others

Vaibhav Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vijay Kumar Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Puran Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others