AKHILESH KUMAR SINGH Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The respondents Counsel was given an option to file counter-affidavit which he did not opt to file. He has argued the matter relying upon the decision or Supreme Court reported in AIR 1999 SC 896, State Bank of India v. Y.V. Rao, the said decision has no application with the present case.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relie dupon Section 11-A(2) of the U.P. Agricultural Credit Act, 1973.

(3.) In para 4 and 6 of the Writ Petition, it has been stated that the petitioner become defaulter in 1989 and the amount became due was not recovered. The recovery certificate which has been issued after seven years is hereby quashed in view of provision of Section 11-A (2) of the U.P. Agricultural Credit Act.