WPMS/433/2022 of SACHIN Vs SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRTE ROORKEE

Court: Uttarakhand High Court
Decision date: 2022-03-14
Case number: 433 of 2022

Parties

WPMS/433/2022 of SACHIN (PETITIONER)
SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRTE ROORKEE (RESPONDENT)

Cites (1)

ARNESH KUMAR versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. (2014)

Statutes cited (3)

constitution of india, article-226 (1950)
constitution of india (1950)
indian penal code (1860)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Conclusion

|**2-3** **SL.** **No**|**Date**|**Office Notes, reports, orders** **or proceedings or directions** **and Registrar’s order with** **Signatures**|**COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS**|
|---|---|---|---|
||**10.03.2022**||WPMS No. 433 of 2022 **Hon’ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.** Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ajay Singh Bisht, Addl. CSC, for the State. Mr. Chandra Mauli Sah, Advocate, for respondent No. 3. The admitted facts, which are apparent from the pleadings of the writ petition, are that the late father of the petitioner had taken financial assistance of Rs. 10.00 lakh, for the purposes of purchasing of agricultural implements. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, that the late father of the petitioner initially suffered from kidney infection problems and thereafter his spine too, was fractured, due to which, he could not remit the loan amount within time and ultimately, the father of the petitioner met with the sad demise on 17.12.2019. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted, that as against the total financial assistance, which was taken by the late father of the petitioner, he had already deposited sum of Rs. 7.00 lakh and also sum of Rs. 3.28 lakh, at later stage. Be that as it may. The challenge in the present writ petition as given by the petitioner is to the Recovery Citation dated 04.10.2021, wherein an amount of Rs. 18,85,982/- has been directed to be recovered from the petitioner. When the matter was taken up in the pre- lunch session, the learned counsel for the petitioner had expressed is consensus, that he is willing to remit the entire amount in its entirety, subject to the condition that the Court exercises its discretionary powers in fixing easy instalments. The Court proposes to fix four equal quarterly instalments for the remittance of the total loan amount. The matter was posted in the post-lunch session on the request of the learned counsel for the respondent/bank,in|||||order to complete his instructions. The proceedings revived in the post-lunch session. The learned counsel for the respondent/bank has made statement, that they are in agreement and if the entire amount is remitted by the petitioner in four equal quarterly instalments, they would not have any objection as such, as of now. In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition would stand disposed of subject to the following terms and conditions:- i. The entire amount, as sought to be recovered from the petitioner in pursuance to the impugned Recovery Citation dated 04.10.2021, would be ensured to be remitted by the petitioner, to the respondent bank within period of one year in four equal quarterly instalments and the 1st instalment being payable by the petitioner within two months from today. The remaining amount would be paid by the petitioner to the respondent/bank, in three equal quarterly instalments thereafter. ii. If there is any default committed by the petitioner in remittance of the amount, as directed above, it will be left open for the respondent/bank, to resort to the proceedings of the recovery, as per the Recovery Citation dated 04.10.2021. iii. It is further made clear, that since the directions to deposit the amount has been made with the consensus arrived at with the respondent/bank and by the exercise of discretion of this Court, no recovery charges would be levied, if the amount is to be deposited by the petitioner, with the respondent/bank. iv. All amounts due to be paid towards the interest payable during the intervening period, will be discharged by the petitioner in the last instalment to be paid by the petitioner. Subject to the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. **(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)** 10.03.2022 Mahinder/|
|---|---|---|---|