DWARIKA Vs. PARGANA ADHLKARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O. P. Garg, J. By means of this writ petition, the recovery proceedings have been challenged and it is prayed that the citation of recovery issued by the respon dent-Bank be quashed. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) THE petitioners had taken a loan for agricultural purposes. THE petitioners admit their liability to pay the outstanding dues of loan but have taken the plea that certain amounts, which have been deposited, have not been properly ad justed credited and that the compound interest as well as collection charges are not recoverable. It is further stated that the respondent-Bank be directed to furnish a statement of the outstanding dues. All the questions of fact raised in this writ petition cannot be gone into and sifted by this Court in writ jurisdiction. THEse aspects of the matter can properly be decided by respondent- Bank.

(3.) NEEDLESS to say that in view of the decision in Seth Banarsi Das v. District Magistrate/collector Meerut, (1996) 2 SCC 689 :1996 (1) JCLR 867 (SC) and Mirza Javed Murtaza v. U. P. Financial Corpora tion Kanpur and another, AIR 1983 Al lahabad 234 as well as recent decision in M/s Asha Textiles Pvt. Ltd. and others v. State of U. P. and others, 1998alr (33) 417 : 1998 (1) JCLR 899 (All), no collection charges can be levied unless auction takes place of action towards recovery of the amount is taken. In the instant case, if the auction has not taken place, in that event the respondent-Bank, is not entitled to realise collection charges. As regards realisation of compound interest, the respondent-Bank shall take into con sideration the decision of the Supreme Court in Corporation Bank v. Gowda and another, JT1994 (7) SC 87, as well as, the guidelines circulated by the Reserve Bank of India with regard to the agricultural loan, and shall pass appropriate orders in the light thereof. Petition disposed of. .