Disposed

Srimati and Another v. Aryavart Gramin Bank Thru. Authorized Officer Barabanki and 2 Others

Allahabad HC16 Dec 2024WRIC/6731/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order noticing a writ petition challenging a bank's rejection of a loan recovery representation. Directions issued to issue notice to respondent no.3, grant time to parties, and exchange pleadings.

What did the court decide?

Notice issued to respondent no.3; three days' time granted to petitioners; exchange of pleadings directed.

Srimati and Another vs Aryavart Gramin Bank Thru… — Banking and Recovery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 19

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6731 of 2024

¶3

Petitioner :- Srimati And Another

¶4

Respondent :- Aryavart Gramin Bank Thru. Authorized Officer Barabanki And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- Lalit Shukla,C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned State Counsel and Shri Pravin Kumar Singh, who has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no.1/ respondent-Bank is taken on record.

¶7

The present writ petition has been preferred for quashing of the impugned order dated 02.03.2024 by which the representation of the petitioners has been rejected by the respondent-Bank.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners had taken a loan of Rs.20,24,000/- on 07.06.2016 for establishing a dairy under the Micro Kamdhenu Dairy Yojana and thereafter he purchased 15 milking animals/ cattle but due to one reason or other, all the 15 animals died and due to which the petitioners were unable to pay the monthly installments on time. The Bank had initiated proceedings of recovery of the amount from the petitioners ignoring completely for the dead animals, the Bank could recover that amount from the Insurance Company with whom the animals were insured.

¶9

On the other hand, Shri Pravin Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank has submitted that for recovery from the Insurance Company, the loanee has to file the insurance claim before the Bank, which is to be forwarded by the Bank to the Insurance Company, whereas the petitioners had filed the insurance claim of only one animal and insurance claim with regard to 14 animals were never filed by the petitioners before the Bank. So, except one animal, the amount against other dead

¶10

animals cannot be adjusted and the petitioners are liable to pay the same.

¶11

It is further submitted that the petitioners were also asked to avail the benefit of one time settlement scheme (hereinafter referred to as 'OTS') which was going on with the Bank but the petitioners had not contacted the Bank for the OTS.

¶12

In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn attention of this Court to Para 17 of the writ petition, wherein it has specifically been pleaded that the petitioners have submitted entire information regarding death of the cattle and also submitted the claim forms but the Bank had not given any acknowledgment to the petitioners and has submitted that the things would be clarified from the Insurance Company for the reason after the claim submitted by the petitioners, it would have been forwarded by the respondent Bank to the respondent no.3, for the purposes of insurance claim.

¶13

Issue notice to respondent no.3.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners prays for and is granted three days' time for taking steps.

¶15

List this case in the week commencing 16.09.2024 as fresh.

¶16

In the meantime, parties may exchange the pleadings.

¶17

Office is directed to submit the service report by the next date of listing.

¶18

When the case is next listed, name of Shri Pravin Kumar Singh shall be printed in the cause list as learned counsel for the respondent-Bank/ respondent no.1.

¶19

Order Date :- 7.8.2024 Mohd. Sharif

¶20

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Srimati and Another v. Aryavart Gramin Bank Thru. Authorized Officer Barabanki and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srimati and Another v. Aryavart Gramin Bank Thru. Authorized Officer Barabanki 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt.Vidya Srivastava Vs U.P.S.R.T.C.

Shiv Kumar Vs Arun Kumar Singh

Ram Milan Pal Vs State of U.P.through Collector Faizabad

Manoj Kumar Srivastava vs Mr. Nitin Bansal, Director, Local Bodies, U.P., Lko.

Shyam Bihari vs Dr. Rangaraju T. Deputy Director, Dudhwa National Park / Tiger Reserve, Palia Kheri

Jagdamba Prasad Mishra vs Sri Jai Prakash Pandey, Distt. Judge, Civil Court, Sultanpur