DALJEET SINGH AND ANOTHER vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

Sudhanshu Dhulia, J

(1)Petitioners had admittedly taken loan of Rs. 17,00,000/- (rupees seventeen lakhs only) on 02.3.2013 from the respondent bank which they could not

return. After continuous default in paying the monthly installments on the part of the petitioners, the respondent bank initiated recovery proceedings

and sent notice to the petitioners under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities

Interest Act, 2002. Being aggrieved, petitioners have filed the present writ petition.Â

(2)Â On 5.12.2017, this Court granted time to the petitioners to deposit at least some part of the amount by 15.1.2018 in order to show their bona fide,

but the petitioners failed to deposit the part amount, i.e. rupees four lakhs. Thereafter on 12.3.2018, on the prayer of the petitioners, the time to deposit

the part amount was extended up to 12.4.2018. Petitioners again did not comply with the orders of this Court. On 16.4.2018, further one week’s

time was again granted to the petitioners to make the part payment with the respondent bank, yet the payment has not been made. Now, further time

is being prayed for by the petitioners. Â

(3)Â It is clear that despite availing repeated opportunities, petitioners failed to show their bona fide. In these circumstances, no interference is called

for in the matter by this Court. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Petitioner in any case has a remedy to file an appeal under Section 17 of the

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Writ

petition stands dismissed.   Â