Disposed

Dattatray Suresh Parande v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC22 Feb 2023WP/1545/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition regarding recovery certificate and frozen bank account, the High Court directed the Credit Society to accept the petitioner's fortuitous settlement offer of Rs.18,26,948/- without interest, defroze the petitioner's account, and set the first tranche payment for two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Credit Society to accept Rs.18,26,948/- as final settlement; Bank Account defroze; First tranche of Rs.11,00,000/- to be paid within two weeks.

Dattatray Suresh Parande Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

4.wp.1545.23.doc

¶2

HARSHADA H. SAWANT
 ( P.A.)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.1545 OF 2023

¶6

Dattatray Suresh Parande..Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Maharashtra and Ors...Respondents

¶9

Mr. Rahul S. Kadam, Advocate for Petitioner

¶10

Mr. S.S. Kanetkar, Advocate for Respondent No.4

¶11

Ms. V. S. Nimbalkar, AGP for State – Respondent Nos.1 to 3

¶12

Mr. Rahul Parande, Manager of Respondent No.4 present

¶13

CORAM:MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE:FEBRUARY 22, 2023

¶14

P.C.:

¶15

1. Heard Mr. Kadam, learned Advocate for Petitioner; Ms.

¶16

Nimbalkar, learned AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 – State; Mr.
Kanetkar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.4 and Mr. Parande,

¶17

Manager of Respondent No.4.

¶18

2. On 20.02.2023, this Court passed the following order:-

¶19

“1. ……….

¶20

2. ……….

¶21

3.Respondent No.4 – Bank has filed a substantive Affidavit
dated 13.02.2023, inter alia, placing on record the exact
amount of outstanding in respect of the recovery certificate as
on 09.02.2023.The statement of outstanding amount is placed
at Exhibit-3 page No.73 to the Affidavit-in-Reply of the Bank.

¶22

4.Mr. Kadam has raised a preliminary objections, inter alia,
with respect to inclusion of legal charges as also certain amount
of penal interest as appearing in the said statement. He would
submit that in that view of the matter, the amount is in excess
by Rs.2,37,000/- approximately, if the aforementioned heads
are considered as per the statement of Respondent No.4 – Bank.

¶23

1 of 4

¶24

4.wp.1545.23.doc

¶25

However, Mr. Kadam has obtained instructions from the
Petitioner i.e. Mr. Dattatray Suresh Parande who is present in
the Court today and urged the Court to consider the passing of
order that the Petitioner is agreeable to pay the outstanding
amount of Rs.18,26,948/- in two tranches namely an amount of
Rs.11,00,000/- which shall be deposited with Respondent No.4
– Bank within a period of one week from today and the balance
amount of Rs.7,26,948/- which shall be deposited within a
period of four months from today, subject to the said amount
being final amount payable by Petitioner without any further
interest.

¶26

5.Despite the objections raised by Mr. Kadam, the
suggestion made by him not only appears to be thoughtful but
would also put an end to the lis between the parties.

¶27

6.In view of the above proposal, Mr. Kanetkar, learned
Advocate for Respondent No.4 – Bank seeks time to obtain
instructions and submit to the Court.

¶28

7.At the request of Mr. Kadam, it is clarified that the afore
mentioned proposal is without prejudice to the rights of the
Petitioner and needless to state that no further interest shall be
leviable on the total outstanding amount which is stated herein
above.

¶29

8.Mr. Kadam would submit that one bank account of the
Petitioner in Union of India, Vishrant wadi Branch, Pune which
has been frozen will have to be released in that event.

¶30

9.At this juncture, Mr. Kanetkar would submit that he would
obtain instructions in that respect also and inform the Court
accordingly.

¶31

10.Stand over to 22nd February, 2023. To be placed under
the caption “First on Board”.”

¶32

3. Mr. Kanetkar, at the outset in compliance of the directions contained in paragraph Nos.8 and 9 would submit that he has obtained instructions from Respondent No.4 – Credit Society and they are agreeable to receive the first tranche of payment of Rs.11,00,000/as directed by this Court in paragraph No.4 of the above order. However, the Bank is not agreeable to accept the balance amount of Rs.7,26,948/- as directed by this Court within the prescribed time

¶33

2 of 4

¶34

4.wp.1545.23.doc

¶35

without interest. He has therefore urged the Court that in terms of the
byelaws of Respondent No.4 – Credit Society, in the event if any
interest is not charged on receipt of payment the Society would be
faced with audit query.

¶36

4. Be that as it may, while recording the submissions and the findings in paragraph No.4 of the above order this Court has noted the objections raised by the Petitioner in respect of an amount of Rs.2,37,000/- in the computation and calculation given by Respondent No.4 – Credit Society which was strongly objected to by Mr. Kadam. Mr. Kadam after taking me through record would submit that the Petitioner has paid substantial amount namely an amount in excess of Rs.16,00,000/- during the pendency of Revisions proceedings and pursuant to above order the Petitioner would now be depositing in excess of Rs.18,00,000/-. The Petitioner had also paid certain other amounts prior to the filing of the Revision proceedings also.

¶37

5. In view of the above, the objection raised by Mr. Kanetkar and the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am not inclined to accept the said objections and Respondent No.4 – Credit Society is directed to accept the amount of Rs.18,26,948/- in full and final settlement of the entire balance outstanding amount as directed by this Court in paragraph No.4 of the above order.

¶38

3 of 4

¶39

4.wp.1545.23.doc

¶40

6. The Petitioner shall file an appropriate undertaking to the effect that they shall honour deposit of two tranches of payment as directed by this Court within the prescribed timeframe and no extension shall be granted by this Court under any reason whatsoever.

¶41

7. It is also directed that the Bank Account

¶42

No.520101362321456 of the Petitioner in Union Bank of India,
Vishrantwadi Branch, Pune as referred to paragraph No.8 of the above
order shall be defrozen by the concerned Bank and the Respondent
No.4 – Credit Society shall withdraw its letter addressed to the said
Bank for the purpose of freezing the same.

¶43

8. In the event of any default on the part of the Petitioner, the entire liability shall be due and payable alongwith penal interest.

¶44

9. At the joint request of Mr. Kadam and Mr. Kanetkar, the first tranche of payment of Rs.11,00,000/- shall be paid by the Petitioner within a period of two weeks from today.

¶45

10. With the above directions, Writ Petition stands disposed.

¶46

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

¶47

Digitally signed SONALI by SONALISATISH KILAJE SATISH Date: 2023.02.23 KILAJE 15:04:35+0530

¶48

4 of 4

Dattatray Suresh Parande v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dattatray Suresh Parande v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

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

Yashwant Balu Patil Vs Housabai Krushna Patil and Ors.

Ganesh Jagannath Bedse Vs the Recovery Officer G P Parsik Co. Op Bank Ltd. and Anr.

Komal @ Kajal Duryodhan Jadhav Vs Shri. Duryodhan Dadu Jadhav and Ors.

Satish Kisan Punde Vs Fulabai Baban Punde and Ors.

Daulat Bhagwant Dinde Vs Namdeo Bhagwant Dinde

Daulat Bhagwanta Dinde Vs Namdev Bhagwant Dinde