Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The petitioner took a loan of Rs. 3,50,000 in 2004 for the purchase of a tractor, from which a substantial amount remains unpaid. The petitioner is not claiming any benefit under the Debt Waiver Relief Scheme-2008 and expressed willingness to repay the outstanding amount along with interest, provided an installment facility is granted. The Bank's primary concern is the recovery of the loan amount. The petitioner sought permission to deposit the amount in easy installments without challenging the correctness of the amount claimed by the Bank. This petition concerns the arrangement for repayment and recovery proceedings related to the loan.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether the petitioner can be permitted to repay the outstanding loan amount in easy installments without challenging the amount claimed by the Bank.
  2. Whether the recovery proceedings should be kept in abeyance during the installment period.
  3. What conditions should govern the installment repayment and recovery process.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner is not seeking any benefit under the Debt Waiver Relief Scheme-2008.
  • The petitioner is willing to repay the entire outstanding amount along with interest if allowed to do so through an installment facility.
  • The petitioner requested permission to deposit the entire amount in easy installments without disputing the correctness of the amount claimed.

Bank's Arguments

  • The Bank emphasized its primary concern of recovering the outstanding loan amount.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court considered the petitioner's willingness to repay the loan amount in installments without disputing the correctness of the amount claimed by the Bank. Balancing the Bank’s interest in recovery with the petitioner’s request for an installment facility, the Court allowed the repayment in six equal installments with specific conditions. The Court ordered that recovery proceedings be kept in abeyance during the installment period but allowed the Bank to resume recovery proceedings immediately if the petitioner defaults on any installment. The Court also provided directions regarding adjustment of amounts already paid, recovery charges, supply of account statements, release of attached property and the petitioner, and the effect of any prior auction. The Court clarified that this order does not affect other recovery proceedings or writ petitions filed by the petitioner. The possibility of modification or recall of the order was left open if any facts provided by the petitioner were found incorrect by the Bank authorities.

Holding and Implications

The writ petition is disposed of with directions permitting the petitioner to repay the outstanding loan amount in six equal installments over a period of ten months, with recovery proceedings stayed during this period subject to compliance.

The direct effect of this decision is that the petitioner is allowed a structured repayment plan, providing relief from immediate coercive recovery actions, while ensuring the Bank’s right to recover the loan is preserved in case of default. The order does not establish any new legal precedent and does not impede any other recovery proceedings or legal remedies available to the parties.

    Shaukeen v. State Of U.P. And Others

    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjay Singh, Advocate for respondent-Bank.

    It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is not claiming any benefit under the Debt Waiver Relief Scheme-2008, and whatever amount is sought to be recovered, qua the same the petitioner is ready to the same along with interest provided instalement facility is extended.

    Learned counsel for the Bank states that the anxiety of the Bank is that the amount should be recovered back.

    Admittedly petitioner took loan to the tune of Rs. 3,50,000/- in the year 2004 for purchase of Tractor out of which petitioner has not paid substantial amount. Petitioner submits that he is ready to deposit whole of the amount in easy installment.

    At this stage without challenging correctness of amount sought to be recovered a prayer has been made that if amount sought to be recovered is permitted to be deposited in easy instalments deposit of entire amount can be made.

    Accordingly this petition is disposed of with the following directions:

    (i) Petitioner may deposit the entire amount sought to be recovered directly in concerned Bank/Samiti in six equal instalments. In calculating the arrears the amount (if any) already paid will be adjusted.

    (ii) The first instalment may be deposited within two months from today, and rest of instalments be deposited at the interval of two months. These deposits may be made before the Branch of the Bank from where the loan was taken. In case instalments are deposited in the Bank then half of the recovery charges only be recovered from the petitioner.

    (iii) During period the recovery proceedings will be kept in abeyance. In case petitioner defaults in depositing any of the instalments within the above stipulated time it will be open to the respondents to start recovery proceedings again by taking coercive process at once to which the petitioner undertakes not to challenge.

    (iv) Petitioner may file an application for supply of statement of account alongwith the duly stamped self addressed envelope. In case any such application is filed, the concerned branch of the Bank will give the same to the petitioner after deposit of first instalment within fifteen days.

    (v) This order will not affect any auction if it has already taken place. In that event the petitioner may take appropriate legal proceedings to set aside the auction under U.P.Z.A & L.R. Act and Rules 1952 or file a suit in accordance with law.

    (vi) It is clarified that this order will be operative and will not come in way of recovers process in any manner, if any, other writ petition has been filed before this Court against the recovery proceeding for the loan amount.

    (vii) Property (agricultural land/tractor) belonging to the petitioner, if attached in connection with recovery proceedings, will be released by the concerned Tahsil authority (unless it has been auctioned) after deposit of first instalment and further moment first instalment is paid the applicant shall also be released.

    (viii) if any fact given from the side of the petitioner is found to be incorrect by bank authorities. It will be open for them to move an application for modification/recall of the order.

    With the aforesaid writ petition stands disposed of.

    Order Date :- 29.1.2010

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Shaukeen v. State Of U.P. And Others
    (Jan 29, 2010)