CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Kishan Singh Bhandari vs District Magistrate Pithoragarh And Ors.

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 18 April 2026 · Citation: (2026) 04 UK CK 1704

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pankaj Purohit, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Securitisation And Reconstruction Of Financial Assets And Enforcement Of Security Interest Act, 2002 — Section 13(2)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition Miscellaneous Single No. 3315 Of 2024
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 438 words

Pankaj Purohit, J

1.

Petitioner took a business loan from the respondent-SBI on different dates and when the petitioner defaulted in making the repayment of the loan amount, the account of petitioner was made Non Performing Asset (NPA) on 29.11.2022.

2.

The proceeding for repayment of loan amount from the petitioner has been initiated on 01.08.2023 under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. An amount of Rs.2,50,49,746.79 is outstanding against the petitioner as on 31.03.2026.

3.

Petitioner has moved the present writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 16.11.2024 (Annexure No.5) issued by the District Magistrate, Pithoragarh as well as the possession order dated 01.11.2023 (Annexure No.3) issued by respondent-SBI and demand order dated 01.08.2023 (Annexure No.2) issued by respondent-Bank.

4.

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner showed his willingness to repay the amount of One Time Settlement (OTS) arrived at between the parties.

5.

The instructions were called from the respondent-SBI and it is submitted by learned counsel for respondent-SBI on instructions that if the petitioner would show his bonafide by depositing an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- to the respondent-SBI soon along with an application of OTS, his OTS application shall be considered by respondent-SBI in accordance with law.

6.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is ready to deposit an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- to the respondent-Bank within 15 days from today, but, there is apprehension in the mind of petitioner, as earlier his OTS application has been rejected by the respondent-Bank and this time, he wants his OTS application should be considered by the respondent-SBI positively.

7.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the entire material available on record, this Court is of the view that if the petitioner is ready to pay outstanding amount of settlement and at the same time he is ready to deposit a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- within 15 days from today showing his gesture towards respondent-SBI, respondent-SBI should consider the OTS application of petitioner sympathetically.

8.

In such view of the matter, the present writ petition is disposed of. It is provided that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- to the respondent-SBI within 15 days from today along with the application for One Time Settlement (OTS). If such application is filed by petitioner after depositing Rs.50,00,000/- to respondent-SBI as stated hereinabove, the respondent-Bank shall consider the said application sympathetically in accordance with law in order to settle the dispute amicably. Till decision is taken on the OTS application, no coercive measure shall be taken against the petitioner.

9.

Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.