Disposed¶23

Prava Ranjan Mishra v. the Branch Manager, Hdfc Bank Ltd, Bbsr

Orissa HC13 May 2024WP(C)/9909/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

One Time Settlement (OTS); HDFC Bank; closure of loan account; borrower versus bank; EMI default and legal notice; earlier writ W.P.(C) No.27437 of 2023; direction to submit reasonable proposal to bank; consideration in accordance with law; no coercive direction issued; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Dr. Justice S.K. Panigrahi; order dated 13.05.2024; W.P.(C) No.9909 of 2024; writ petition disposed of; no statute or precedent cited.

What did the court decide?

No mandamus issued; Petitioner directed to approach the Opposite Party/HDFC Bank with a reasonable proposal, which the Bank shall consider in accordance with law if acceptable; writ petition disposed of. ¶23

Prava Ranjan Mishra Vs the Branch Manager, Hdfc Bank Ltd, Bbsr — Orissa HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.9909 of 2024

¶2

Prava Ranjan Mishra …. Petitioner

¶3

Represented By Adv.

¶4

Mr. S. Mishra

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. The Branch Manager, HDFC Opposite Parties Bank Ltd., Bhubaneswar

¶7

Represented By Adv. Mr. Rajeet Roy

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER

Order

13.05.2024

No.

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶16

2 . The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking a direction from this Court to the Opposite Party/HDFC Bank to close the loan account of the Petitioner through One Time Settlement Scheme vide Annexure-6 Series.

¶17

3 . Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

¶18

4 . Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner had availed two loans of Rs.30,00,000/- and Rs.5,35,600/- from the Opposite Party/HDFC Bank and was paying the EMI on time. But due to non-realization

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

of money vide Annexure-3, the Opposite Party/HDFC Bank issued legal notice without any fault. Thereafter, the Petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.27437 of 2023 and this Court disposed of the same with a direction to the Opposite Party/HDFC Bank that if the Petitioner has any grievance regarding the calculation of the principle of interest, the Opposite Party/HDFC Bank welcome the Petitioner to sort out the differences if any. Accordingly, the Petitioner approached the Opposite Party/HDFC Bank on 07.09.2023. After a lot of correspondence between both the parties, no final decision could be taken by the Opposite Party/HDFC Bank.

¶22

5 . Considering the facts and submissions made, the Petitioner is directed to approach the Opposite Party/HDFC Bank with a reasonable proposal. If the proposal is acceptable, the Opposite Party/HDFC Bank shall consider the same in accordance with law.

¶23

6 . Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)

¶26

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAKDesignation: Jr. Stenographer Judge Reason: Authentication Sumitra Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 14-May-2024 10:45:38

¶27

Page 2 of 2

Prava Ranjan Mishra v. the Branch Manager, Hdfc Bank Ltd, Bbsr

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prava Ranjan Mishra v. the Branch Manager, Hdfc Bank Ltd, Bbsr

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

M/S. Kokila Industries Vs Union of India

Sahara India Commercial Corp. Ltd., Kendrapara Vs State of Odisha

Mason and Summers Mark Vs Fortune Spirit Ltd.

Akshaya Kumar Swain Vs State of Odisha

Swapnabrata Dash Vs Punjab and Sind Bank, Andhra Pradhesh

Rita Parichha Vs the National Horticulture Board, Bbsr