Laxminarayan Mohapatra Vs Chief Manager, Asset Management Branch, Uco Bank, Bbsr — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Laxminarayan Mohapatra Vs Chief Manager, Asset Management Branch, Uco Bank, Bbsr — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the Petitioner and the Opposite Party/Bank to jointly approach the learned DRT, Cuttack for settlement of the outstanding dues, with the DRT to verify the settlement and pass a reasoned order; no direction issued by this Court for issuance of the No Dues Certificate/No Objection Certificate or return of the Original Title Documents.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Opposite Party/Bank's failure to issue the No Dues Certificate/No Objection Certificate and to return the Original Title Documents, despite receiving the entire full and final settlement amount within the prescribed time under the OTS sanction/acceptance letter dated 30.09.2024, called for interference by this Court. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Considering the facts and submissions made, and since the matter is pending before the learned DRT, Cuttack in O.A. No.367 of 2015, the Court directed the Petitioner and the Opposite Party/Bank to approach the learned DRT, Cuttack jointly for settlement of the outstanding dues; in the aftermath of the settlement, the learned DRT, Cuttack shall verify and pass a reasoned order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C) No.8061 of 2025 (High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, Dr. Justice S.K. Panigrahi, order dated 07.04.2025): The Petitioner-borrower challenged UCO Bank's action in not issuing a No Dues Certificate/No Objection Certificate and in not returning his Original Title Documents notwithstanding the Bank's receipt of the entire full and final settlement amount within the time prescribed by the OTS sanction/acceptance letter dated 30.09.2024. The Bank's counsel pointed out that recovery proceedings were pending before the DRT, Cuttack in O.A. No.367 of 2015 (outstanding dues of Rs.19,87,043/- arising out of a Term Loan of Rs.8,00,000/- sanctioned against a sought facility of Rs.10,00,000/-, repayable in 84 EMIs of Rs.13,100/- each with interest @9.5%, the account having been declared NPA on 31.12.2013). Holding that the matter was pending before the DRT, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition, directing the Petitioner and the Bank to jointly approach the learned DRT, Cuttack for settlement of the outstanding dues, with the DRT to verify the settlement and pass a reasoned order.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.8061 of 2025

Shri Laxminarayan Mohapatra ..…... Petitioner(s)

Mr. Tuna Sahu, Adv.

-Versus-

The Chief Manager, Asset Management Branch, UCO Bank, Bhubaneswar ………. Opposite Party (s) Smt. Aparna Das, Adv.

CORAM:

DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI

ORDER

07.04.2025

Order No.

This matter is taken up through a hybrid arrangement.

The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the action of the Opposite Party/Bank in not issuing the No Dues Certificate/No Objection Certificate as well as in not returning the Original Title Documents despite receiving the entire full and final settlement amount within prescribed time period as indicated in the OTS sanction/acceptance letter dated 30.09.2024.

Heard learned counsels for the Parties.

2

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner approached the Opposite Party/Bank on 19.12.2025 for obtaining credit facility to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- for business, but, the Opposite Party/Bank has sanctioned only a sum of Rs.8,00,000/in shape of Term Loan which has to be paid in 84 EMIs of Rs.13,100/- each with interest @9.5%. After availing the said credit facility from the Opposite Party/Bank, the Petitioner has paid a substantial amount of Rs.4,34,020/- till 2008. Thereafter, the Petitioner was unable to repay the installments in a timely manner. As per the sanction letter dated 12.01.2006, the loan amount has to be repaid within a period of 84 EMIs and the repayment period will be over by 12.01.2013. But, the Opposite Party/Bank declared the loan account NPA on 31.12.2013 instead of in the year 2008. After illegal classification of the loan account as NPA, the Opposite Party/Bank had filed a case before the DRT, Cuttack bearing O.A. No.367/2015 for recovering of a sum of Rs.19,87,043/- of the outstanding dues of the bank.

Learned counsel for the Opposite Party/Bank submits that the matter is pending before the learned DRT, Cuttack bearing O.A. No.367 of 2015 for adjudication of the matter.

3

Considering the facts and submissions made and since the matter is pending before the learned DRT, Cuttack bearing O.A. No.367 of 2015, the Petitioner and the Opposite Party/Bank are directed to approach the learned DRT, Cuttack jointly for settlement of the outstanding dues. In the aftermath of the settlement of the amount, the learned DRT, Cuttack shall verify and pass a reasoned order.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

(Dr. S.K. Panigrahi)

Judge

Sumitra

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: SUMITRA NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 08-Apr-2025 18:46:59