AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Arun Mishra, J.—The matter in question is to be governed by the decision of this Court rendered in W.P. No. 6385/2000 on 25.9.2001. The following order was passed by this Court :
"By this writpetition though various averments have been made and prayers have been sought for, the grievance, in essence, is that the petitioner has deposited certain sum with the Jabalpur Nagrik Sahakari Bank Limited, the respondent No. 2 herein and . while the amount is in deposit, the Reserve Bank of India, respondent No. 3 has cancelled the Banking licence of the respondent No. 2 as aresult of which the petitioner is not able to withdraw his deposit.
Mr. R.K. Jaiswal, learned Counsel for the petit''oner has deposited Rs. 1,53,000/- with respondent No. 2, Bank and the same should be refunded to him. Learned Counsel Mr. Tiwari, appearing for respondent No. 2, Bank submitted that the Banking licence has been cancelled the amount cannot be paid to the petitioner. At this juncture, Mr. Dharmadhikari, learned Counsel appearing for the Reserve Bank of India, respondent No. 3 and Deposit Insurance Credit Guarantee Corporation, respondent No. 4 submitted that the respondent No. 2 cannot pay but the respondent No. 4 can pay one lac of rupees if claimed by the Bank in a proper proforma.
In view of the aforesaid, I am inclined to direct that respondent No. 2 would lodge a claim in respect of the petitioner, Dr. T.R. Dubey within a period of two weeks from today. Thereafter, the respondent No. 4 shall send a draft of one lac rupees to the petitioner in this present address. As far as the balance is concerned, the petitioner would be governed by the liquidation if done eventually. This direction is given without prejudice to the contention raised by the respondent No. 2 before any other Court.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of."
The case of the petitioner is similar. Petitioner is one of the creditors and claims similar treatment by the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4. In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the respondent No. 1 would lodge a claim in respect of the petitioner within a period of 2 weeks from today, in case the same has not been lodged so far. Thereafter the respondent No. 3, Deposit Insurance Credit Guarantee Corporation shall decide the claim and make the payment of admissible amount. As far as balance is concerned and the rights of the parties, they are to be governed as per the observation made in the above quoted order.
The case of the same persons have to be treated similarly. Let the respondents take steps in accordance with the direction issued by this Court in previous writ petition referred to above. Since there is already an order passed by this Court, matter of the petitioner is to be governed by this decision. In case the case is to be treated any differently, then the respondents are free to assign special reason within 15 days of the petition.
Writ Petition is disposed of.