Anil Kumar vs State of Uttarakhand and two others

Hon''ble B.S. Verma, J.—Heard Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, Advocate for petitioner, Mr. K.C. Tewari, Brief Holder, on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 and Mr. Siddharth Sah, Advocate for respondent No.3. By means of this petition the petitioner has sought the following relief:-

(1) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned recovery/notice dated 7-2-2012 (Annexure No.2 to the writ petition), issued by the respondent No.2.

(2) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to first adjust the F.D.R. of Rs. 40,000/- (now along with interest) lying with the Bank as guarantee money and then recover remaining amount from the petitioner in easy instalment as fixed by this Hon''ble High Court.

(3) To issue any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon''ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

(4) To award the cost of the petition to the petitioner.

According to petitioner, the petitioner was sanctioned a Cash Credit Limit of Rs. 50,000/- by respondent bank in the year 2000. Brother of petitioner was guarantor in the aforesaid Cash Credit Limit along with one Mr. Sunil Kumar Jayaswal, whose FDR of Rs. 40,000/- is still lying with the bank as security against the aforesaid Cash Credit Limit. In the year 2002, in family settlement the ownership of the shop/house where the business was running went to the share of petitioner''s brother. Thereafter the petitioner started his business of milk dairy at Raiwala which is still running. In the year 2003 petitioner''s brother sold out the house and also closed the business of Jai Gange Milk Cake Bhandar and this fact came to the knowledge of petitioner after a long period and due to aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case the petitioner could not repaid the entire loan amount. On 7-2-2012 the respondent No.2 issued recovery citation against petitioner for a sum of Rs. 2,99,857/- along with recovery charges. The petitioner is ready to pay the loan amount in easy instalments.

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the petitioner had pledged the F.D.R. of Rs. 40,000/- with bank at the time of taking the loan as security and now the F.D.R. has matured and the sum of the aforesaid F.D.R. be adjusted from the loan amount.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent/Bank, on the basis of instructions sought from the Bank, has contended that if the petitioner deposits the loan amount in equal four quarterly instalment, he has no objection and the amount of the F.D.R. shall also be adjusted in the loan amount.

In view of above facts of the case the Bank/respondent No.3 is directed to adjust the amount of F.D.R. from the loan amount and also inform the recovery officer how-much amount is balance against the petitioner after adjustment of the amount of the F.D.R.

After having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be served if the petitioner is directed to deposit the entire outstanding amount of loan along with interest and recovery charges, before the recovery officer, in equal four quarterly instalments.

Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to pay the entire loan amount outstanding against him, after adjusting the amount of F.D.R. by the Bank, in equal four quarterly instalment. The first instalment shall be paid after two months i.e. by 31st May, 2012, before the recovery officer. The subsequent intalments shall become payable by 31st day of the month after every three months thereafter. It is made clear that in case the petitioner commits a default in payment of any of the instalment, as directed above, the respondent No.2, recovery officer, would be at liberty to recover the entire outstanding amount from the petitioner in lump-sum. Accordingly, the impugned recovery citation issued by the respondent No.2 shall not be given effect to by the respondents if the petitioner deposit the amount under recovery certificate as directed above. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of finally.