Disposed¶17

Akhilesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC26 Jun 2023/5223/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Recovery certificate; R.C. Form-36; show cause notice; cooperative bank loan recovery; Uttar Pradesh Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Limited Mahmudabad Sitapur; installment payment direction; abeyance of recovery; writ of certiorari; WRIT - C No. 5223 of 2023; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Subhash Chandra Sharma, J.; decided 26.6.2023; Neutral Citation 2023:AHC-LKO:41744.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of finally with a direction to the petitioner to deposit Rs.30,000/- within one month and the remaining amount in four equal installments at three-month intervals; on regular deposits the operation of the recovery certificate shall remain in abeyance, and on default the interim protection granted by the order ends. ¶17

Akhilesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned show cause notice dated 11.05.2023 received in R.C. Form-36 from the office of the opposite party no.3, demanding deposit of Rs.1,48,733/- pursuant to the recovery certificate, should be quashed by writ of certiorari. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

If the petitioner makes regular deposits as directed, the operation of the recovery certificate shall remain in abeyance; however, if he defaults in making repayment, the interim protection granted by the order will come to an end.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

The Court directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/- within one month, and thereafter to deposit the remaining amount in four equal installments with an interval of three months between each installment.

¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Akhilesh Kumar, an agriculturist borrower, filed a writ petition (certiorari) against a show cause notice dated 11.05.2023 received in R.C. Form-36 from the office of the opposite party no.3 demanding one-time deposit of Rs.1,48,733/- pursuant to a recovery certificate issued by Uttar Pradesh Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Limited, Mahmudabad, Sitapur in respect of a loan of Rs.70,000/- which the petitioner could not repay owing to his daughter's illness (outstanding stated by the State to be Rs.1,66,775/- as on 30.06.2023). The petitioner expressed readiness to repay and sought time and installments. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma, J. disposed of the writ petition finally, directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.30,000/- within one month and the remaining amount in four equal installments at intervals of three months; upon regular deposits the operation of the recovery certificate shall remain in abeyance, and upon default the interim protection granted by the order comes to an end.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:41744

¶2

Court No. - 3

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5223 of 2023

¶4

Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar

¶5

Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others

¶6

Counsel for Petitioner :- Ravi Kumar Verma,Shivendra Pratap Singh

¶7

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sanjeev Kumar Singh

¶8

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.C.S.C. for the State alongwith Sri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.4.

¶10

The instant petition has been filed with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned show cause notice dated 11.05.2023 received in R.C. Form-36 from the office of the opposite party no.3 for depositing one time outstanding amount of Rs.1,48,733/(Rupees one lakh forty eight thousand seven hundred thirty three only).

¶11

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner took a loan of Rs.70,000/- from Uttar Pradesh Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Limited, Mahmudabad, Sitapur but could not repay the same on account of illness of his daughter, as such, the amount with interest became Rs.1,48,733/- as per recovery certificate issued by the bank which was received by the petitioner on 11.05.2023.

¶12

It is further contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he is ready to repay the loan amount to the bank concerned but some time be given to him and installments be made for facilitating the repayment of amount because he is an agriculturist.

¶13

Learned A.C.S.C. for the State alongwith learned counsel for the opposite party no.4 contended that till 30.06.2023, the amount have become Rs.1,66,775/-.

¶14

In the circumstances of the case, it is expedient to direct that the petitioner will deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/- within a period of one month from today and thereafter remaining amount will be deposited by him in four equal installments in the interval of

¶15

three months between each installment.

¶16

If the petitioner makes regular deposits as aforesaid, the operation of recovery certificate shall remain in abeyance. However, if the petitioner defaults in making repayment, in such a situation, the interim protection granted in this order, will come to an end.

¶17

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of finally .

¶18

Order Date :- 26.6.2023 Saurabh

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akhilesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhilesh Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amir vs State of U.P. and Another

Pawan Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nirdosh Rana Vs State of U.P.

Lavkush Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Gram Vikas, Govt. U.P. Lucknow and 5 Others

Santosh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supplies, Lko. and 2 Others

Alok Verma and 11 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Medical and Health Deptt. Lko and 2 Others