NASIR KHAN Vs. COLLECTOR MORADABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri V. K. Goel the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Dr. Madhu Tandon learned Brief Holder of the State of U. P., representing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Nobody appears for the Syndicate Bank, the respondent No. 3.

(2.) By means of the impugned citation dated 1st August, 1995, a copy whereof is Annexure-2 to the petition, the petitioner has been called upon by the respondent No. 2 to pay a sum of Rs. 8.363, besides collection charges, etc.

(3.) From the averments made In the petition. It appears that the petitioner was granted by the respondent No. 3 overdraft facility against his Account in the Bank under a written agreement between him and the Bank. The limit of overdraft was' fixed at Rs. 7,000.