SOHAN SINGH Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE UDHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S.K. Mandal for the petitioner and Sri S. S. Adhikar. Standing counsel for the respondents.

(2.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging recovery by which a sum of Rs.92,600/- has been demanded. According to the petitioner he is a small farmer and has taken loan of Rs.45,000/- for flower garden and Rs. 19,500/- for irrigation boring). It has been stated in paragraph 8 of the petition that on 20-5-2003 Amin came to his house and served a notice for demand of Rs.92,600/-. Petitioner has also appeared before the Tehsildar and made a oral representation but of no avail.

(3.) According to the petitioner no account has been furnished by the Bank so as to enable him to come to the conclusion that the citation made by the Tehsildar is correct. Further according to him calculation of interest is wholly incorrect and no compound interest can be charged. In the case of Central Bank of India v. Ravindra, AIR 2001 SC 3095 the Apex Court has observed (Para 55)