M/s Dayal Seeds vs Nainital Bank Ltd. And Others

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J

Petitioner is a borrower, who took a C.C. Limit from Nainital Bank, Branch Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. Since petitioner defaulted in

re-payment of the loan, recovery proceedings were initiated against him.

By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following relief:

“(A) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the District Magistrate/ Respondent Bank to only take the

possession of the Mortgage property of the Petitioner which was described in the Application Under Section 14 of the SARFAESI ACT filed before

Respondent No. 3 and to release the Wrongly Possessed Property.â€​

In the writ petition, it is the contention of the petitioner that the respondent-Bank has taken possession of certain assets belonging to the petitioner,

which were not mortgaged with the respondent-Bank.

Learned counsel for the respondent-Bank was asked to seek instructions. Today, on instructions, he submits that the respondent-Bank has taken

possession of only such properties belonging to the petitioner, which were mortgaged with the respondent-Bank and the respondent-Bank has not

taken possession of the property belonging to the petitioner, which was not mortgaged with the respondent-Bank.

In such view of the matter, nothing survives in the writ petition.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by placing the statement of learned counsel for the respondent-Bank on record.