Disposed¶30

Geet Basa v. Uco Bank

Orissa HC11 Apr 2025WP(C)/4627/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, W.P.(C) No.4627 of 2025, decided 11.04.2025 by Dr. Justice S.K. Panigrahi. Keywords: UCO Bank; willful defaulter declaration; loan account classified as 'fraud'; third-party transactions; repayment of entire outstanding dues; setting aside of communication dated 26.12.2024 (Annexure-13) issued by DGM & Zonal Head; deletion from 'fraud' list per Clause 26 of the Bank's Policy, 2024; RBI-prescribed procedure; two-month compliance period; writ petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Setting aside of the impugned communication dated 26.12.2024/Annexure-13 issued by the DGM & Zonal Head, UCO Bank, and a direction to the Bank authorities to delete the Petitioner's loan account from the list of 'fraud' as per Clause 26 of the Policy of the Bank, 2024 and in accordance with RBI-prescribed procedure, within two months.

Geet Basa Vs Uco Bank — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the Opposite Parties'/Bank authorities' declaration treating the Petitioner as a willful defaulter and classifying his loan account as 'fraud' (based on alleged third-party transactions) should be interfered with, given that the Petitioner has paid the entire outstanding loan dues.

¶17

Court's answer

Since the Petitioner has already paid the entire loan outstanding dues, this Court set aside the impugned communication dated 26.12.2024/Annexure-13 issued by the DGM & Zonal Head, UCO Bank.

¶7

Ratio / Principle

The Opposite Parties/Bank authorities were directed to delete the Petitioner's loan account from the list of 'fraud' as per Clause 26 of the Policy of the Bank, 2024 and in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India, within two months from presentation of an authenticated copy of the order.

¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition filed by Geet Basa, a Civil Engineer and work contractor, challenging UCO Bank communications dated 28.07.2021 (Annexure-6), 26.12.2024 (Annexure-13) and 06.01.2025 (Annexure-18), and the Bank's declaration treating him as a willful defaulter and classifying his loan account as 'fraud' allegedly due to third-party transactions. Counsel for the Petitioner argued that the entire outstanding loan dues had already been paid and that the 'fraud' classification harmed his reputation; counsel for the Bank maintained that third-party transactions led to the classification. Holding that the entire dues had been repaid, the Court (Dr. Justice S.K. Panigrahi) set aside the impugned communication dated 26.12.2024/Annexure-13 issued by the DGM & Zonal Head, UCO Bank, and directed the Bank authorities to delete the Petitioner's loan account from the list of 'fraud' as per Clause 26 of the Policy of the Bank, 2024 and in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India, within two months of presentation of an authenticated copy of the order. The Writ Petition was disposed of accordingly.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.4627 of 2025

¶3

Geet Basa …. Petitioner(s)

¶4

Mr. Sidhant Dwibedi, Adv.

¶5

-versus-

¶6

UCO Bank, Bhubaneswar & …. Opposite Party(s) Ors.

¶7

Mr. Subrat Mishra, Adv.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER

Order

11.04.2025

No.

1 . This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶16

2. In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner being a Civil Engineer and also a work contractor has challenged the communications dated 28.07.2021/Annexure-6, dated 26.12.2024/Annexure-13 and dated 06.01.2025/Annexure-18.

¶17

Apart from the above, the Petitioner has also challenged the declaration made by the Opposite Parties/ Bank authorities in treating him as a willful defaulter and also classifying his loan account as ‘fraud’.

¶18

3. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

¶19

Signature Not Verified

¶20

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 15-Apr-2025 16:56:11

¶21

4. Challenging the above noted impugned communications and also the declaration made by the Opposite Parties/Bank authorities in classifying the loan account of the Petitioner as ‘fraud’, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that certain 3^rd party transaction made by the Petitioner triggers

¶22

Page 1 of 3

¶23

classification of the loan account of the Petitioner as ‘fraud’ despite payment of entire loan outstanding dues by him.

¶24

5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that since the Petitioner is a work contractor, his nature of payment often resonates with the allegation made by the Opposite Parties/Bank authorities. He further submits that since the Petitioner has already paid the entire loan outstanding dues in the meantime, classifying his loan account in question as ‘fraud’ due to certain 3^rd party transaction affects his reputation. He, accordingly, prays for allowing the prayer made in this Writ Petition.

¶25

6. In his opposition, learned counsel for the Opposite Parties/ Bank authorities submits that since the Petitioner was engaged in making 3^rd party transactions, his loan account in question has been classified as ‘fraud’.

¶26

7. Be that as it may, since the Petitioner has already paid the entire loan outstanding dues in the meantime, this Court while setting aside the impugned communication dated 26.12.2024/Annexure-13 issued by the DGM & Zonal Head, UCO Bank, directs the Opposite Parties/ Bank authorities to delete the loan account of the Petitioner in question from the list of ‘fraud’ as per the provision at Clause 26 of the Policy of the Bank, 2024 and also in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the Reserve Bank of India in this regard, within a period of two months from the date of presentation of an authenticated copy of this order.

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 15-Apr-2025 16:56:11

¶29

Page 2 of 3

¶30

8. This Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶31

(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)

¶32

Judge

¶33

Ayaskanta

¶34

Signature Not Verified

¶35

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYASKANTA JENA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 15-Apr-2025 16:56:11

¶36

Page 3 of 3

Geet Basa v. Uco Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Geet Basa v. Uco Bank

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jibardhan Mendali Vs State of Odisha

Dillip Pani Vs State of Odisha

Shahzadi Fatma Vs State of Odisha

Dukhi Shyam Swain Vs State of Orissa

State of Orissa Vs Niranjan Nayak

Jacob Varghese Vs State of Odisha