Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/2249/2009 of AMARNATH Vs COLLECTOR/DISTRICT MAGISTRATE HARIDWAR and OTHERS on 31 December 2009
COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2249 OF 2009 (MS) Amarnath …………..Petitioner. Versus Collector/District Magistrate, Haridwar and others. ………..Respondents. Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Addl.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Conclusion
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND ATNAINITAL
WRIT PETITION NO. 2249 OF 2009 (MS)
Amarnath
…………..Petitioner.
Versus
Collector/District Magistrate, Haridwar and others.
………..Respondents.
Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent no. 1 and 2. Mr. Lalit K. Tiwari, Advocate for respondent no. 3.
Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.
Heard Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. K.P. Upadhyay, Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent no. 1 and 2 and Mr. Lalit K. Tiwari, Advocate for respondent no. 3.
By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the recovery citation dated 4.11.2009 issued by the respondent no. 2 against him (contained as Annexure -1 to the writ petition) for recovery of Rs. 53,500/- (Fifty Three Thousand Five Hundred).
The petitioner had admittedly taken a loan from respondent no. 3 i..e Punjab National Bank, Branch Iqbalpur, District Haridwar. This loan has not been repaid and now the recovery citation of Rs. 53,500/- has been issued against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted before this Court that the petitioner is ready to pay the entire remaining loan amount, if some easy instalments are fixed.
The bank is represented by Mr. L.K Tiwari, Advocate, who says that he has no objection in case instalments are fixed for repayment of loan.
Mr. Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. L.K. Tiwari, Advocate for respondent Bank are present before this Court and have agreed to the following terms:
In case the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs. 13,500/- (Thirteen Thousand Five Hundred) with the bank on or before March 1, 2010, the remaining amount shall be given by the petitioner by means of installment of Rs. 4,000/- (Four Thousand), which will shall spread over a period of another 10 months. The first instalment shall be paid by the petitioner on 1[st] April, 2010, second instalment on 1[st] May, 2009 and so on. In case the petitioner commits even one single default in payment of installments, the Bank will be free to initiate recovery proceedings against the petitioner.
With the aforesaid directions, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Rathour
(Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 31.12.2009