Disposed

Satrughna Bhoi v. B.M.,Utkal Gramya Bank

Orissa HC5 Sept 2017WP(C)/12388/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench disposed of the writ petition challenging the Bank's demand notice. It directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 3 lakh within four weeks with an application for settlement, after which the Bank must consider the application within four weeks without taking coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to deposit Rs. 3 lakh and apply for settlement within four weeks; Bank to consider application within four weeks; no coercive action pending decision.

W.P.(C) No.12388 of 2017 03. 05.9.2017 Shri Ashutosh Panda, advocate enters appearance for the opposi te party-Bank and files Vakalatnama in Court today, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri A. Panda, le arned counsel for the opposite party-Bank. This writ petition has been filed challenging the demand notic e dated 05.6.2017 (Annexure-2) issued by the opposite party-Bank, for recovery of the loan due s.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had availed a Term loan of Rs.4.60 lakh from the opposite party-Bank in March 2008, for purch ase of a Tractor for agricultural use. It is submitted that though the petitioner has repaid some amounts, due to financial hardship, he could not repay the balance loan amount in time fo r which, the Bank has issued demand notice for recovery of the loan dues. It is submitted tha t the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit a substantial amount with the Bank towards do wn payment and make an application for one time settlement/rephasement of the balance loan amo unt, which may be considered by the Bank sympathetically and as has been done in similar other cases.

Learned counsel for the Bank-opposite party on instructions su bmits that the present loan dues outstanding against the petitioner is about Rs.8.40 lakh. It is fairly submitted that if the petitioner deposits a substantial amount with the Bank towards down payment and make an application for one time settlement/rephasement of the balance loan amount, the Bank shall consider the same in terms of its existing guidelines and as has been d one in similar other cases.

Considering the submissions made, it is directed that in the event the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- (rupees three lakh) wi th the Bank within four weeks hence along with an application for one time settlement/ rephase ment of the balance loan amount, the Bank shall consider the same in terms of its existing gui delines and as has been done in similar other cases and take a decision thereon within four we eks thereafter.

Till a final decision is taken by the Bank on the application of the petitioner for one time settlement/ rephasement, no coercive action shall be taken agai nst the petitioner pursuant to the notice under Annexure-2 to the writ petition. It is needless to say that if the petitioner does not deposit the amount as directed above within the stipulated period or defaults in making payment of the subsequent installments to be fixed by the Bank after rephasement, the Bank shall be at liber ty to take recourse to such steps as provided in law. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy as per rules.

Satrughna Bhoi v. B.M.,Utkal Gramya Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satrughna Bhoi v. B.M.,Utkal Gramya Bank

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

Dinesh Kumar Behera Vs a.O.,Uco Bank

Debendra N.Balabantr Vs Bank of India

Sabita Rani Mishra Vs State of Odisha

Surendranath Singh Vs Competent Authority

Dinabandhu Mishra Vs NHAI

Prabir Dash Vs State of Orissa