SURESH KUMAR Vs. COLLECTOR, PAURI GARHWAL & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the recovery citation dated 04.11.2016 issued by respondent no.2 in respect of alleged outstanding loan amount of Rs. 17,54,268/- forwarded by the respondent no.3. Further he sought for issuance of direction to respondent no.3 to correct its account statement and to realize the corrected loan amount from the petitioner in easy instalments.

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition, are that the petitioner obtained a loan of Rs. 18,00,000/- from the respondent no.3-bank. But due to some financial hurdles there was default in timely payment of few instalments for which respondent no.3 issued a notice dated 04.03.2016 to the petitioner stating therein that a sum of Rs. 2,94,000/- is overdue. After issuance of notice, petitioner deposited the amount of Rs. 2,20,000/- by 23.06.2016. In between, on 16.05.2016 a notice was again issued by respondent no.3 to the petitioner stating therein that petitioner has not deposited the amount and same has become overdue. On 18.08.2016, a notice was published in daily news paper Amar Ujala on behalf of the Deputy Registrar Cooperative Society Garhwal Region, Pauri stating that the bank has requested for recovery certificate under Section 95A(1) of the Act of 2003 and the persons mentioned in the notice are being issued notice to deposit the entire amount with the bank otherwise an order of recovering the amount as arrears of land revenue will be passed. As many as 78 persons were named in the said notice. Petitioner's name was figured at S.N.37 in the said notice. An amount of Rs. 17,54,268/- was shown as outstanding against the petitioner in the said notice. Thereafter the petitioner deposited a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- on 12.09.2016 and rest amount was adjusted by respondent no.3 in easy instalments as was fixed at the time of sanctioning of loan. The account statement as issued by respondent no.3-bank themselves shown as outstanding of Rs. 17,11,216/-. On 04.11.2016 a recovery citation was issued against the petitioner whereby a sum of Rs. 17,54,268/- has been shown as outstanding.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner respondent no.3-bank has given a false assurance that the amount will be adjusted. He submitted that now the petitioner is in a position to deposit the loan amount in instalment. He also submitted that the petitioner will also deposit the interest and recovery charges.