Samar Eint Udyog vs State of U.P. & Others

Ram Autar Singh, J.

Heard Sri Anil Singh, learned Advoate in support of this petition and Sri K. D. Mishra, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri C. N. Tripathi, learned Advocate and learned Standing Counsel.

Prayer in this petition is for quashing the recovery certificate dated 28.5.2009 issued by the respondent no. 1 by which again recovery proceedings has been started.

At the very outset this Court is to point out that recovery proceeding as is being challenged was also challenged in the earlier petition i.e. writ petition no. 30134 of 2009 which was disposed of on 23.6.2009 by providing a schedule to deposit the amount.

Submission is that petitioner deposited first installment which was to the tune of Rs. 3,32,300/ within time (31.7.2009) and thereafter an application was given for giving statement of account so that petitioner may deposit the same but as no statement he was given to the petitioner was not in a position to deposit future installment.

Be as it may, on the facts this Court is of the view that recovery proceeding is not to be quashed on account of filing of the earlier petition and statement to deposit the amount in instalments and otherwise also on account of disposal of the earlier writ petition by passing of final order but at the same time as counsel for the bank cooperates in an amicable solution of the matter it is? to meet the ends of justice and save the petitioner of irreparable injury which he may suffer, in the event his properties is auctioned as that may be only source of his livelihood.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no lack of bonafide on his part and there was small mistake/negligence of non deposit of the second instalment as petitioner was not sure about the instalment amount but it is fairly submitted that amount of Rs. 5 lakhs is to be deposited within a fortnight and the remaining amount within a reasonable time on being arranged in a fresh move before this Court. In view of the aforesaid, the bank will be receiving good amount very soon and thus the exercise if is accepted in a manner so suggested will do justice for both side.

Accordingly without going into the merits and without issuing the writ, as prayed, this petition is disposed of by giving the following directions :

(i) Petitioner is to deposit an amount of Rs. 5 lakhs on or before 4.1.2010 with the respondent bank. If the amount is deposited the bank will accept that amount.

(ii) On the date when the amount will be deposited/accepted by the bank petitioner will also move an application for getting the details of the balance along with interest so payable upon which the petitioner will be given complete details on that very date itself or within a period of three days thereafter.

(iii) On receipt of the statement as permitted the entire outstanding/balance amount will be deposited by the petitioner in six quarterly instalments payable on or before 4th April, 2010; 4th July, 2010; 4th October, 2010; 4th January, 2011; 4th April, 2011 and 4th July, 2011.

(iv) If the amount is deposited in the aforesaid manner that is to be accepted.

(v) In the event any of the instalment so permitted is not deposited then the interim protection given by the earlier order of this court dated 23.6.2009 or by this order will cease to operate and it will be open for the respondent bank to recover the entire amount at once by taking any coercive measure to which counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner states not to object.

With the aforesaid direction this petition stands disposed of.