Reshmu Devi And Others vs H.P. State Cooperative Agri & Rural ... on 20 July, 2016

[Cites 0, Cited by 9]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Reshmu Devi And Others vs H.P. State Cooperative Agri & Rural ... on 20 July, 2016

Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                                      CWP No. 1542 of 2010.
                                                      Decided on: 20.7.2016.




                                                                          .
    Reshmu Devi and others                                               ....Petitioners.





                      Versus

    H.P. State Cooperative Agri & Rural Development Bank Ltd. Shimla





    and others.
                                                                        ... Respondents.
    ................................................................................................
    Coram




                                               of
    The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1                 No.

    For the petitioners.                 : Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate.
                     rt
    For respondent No.1 &2.             : Mr. S.C. Sharma, Advocate.

    For respondent No.3                 : Mr. Pankaj Negi & Ms. Parul Negi, Dy.
                                          Advocate General.


    Ajay Mohan Goel, J (Oral).

The present petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:

"a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents Bank to settle the case of the petitioner strictly in accordance with the OTS policy Settlement Forumla (a) i.e. "100 percent of the total outstanding balance in the account inclusive of interest as on the date on which the account was categorized as doubtful NPA 12% from the date of the settlement upto the date of final payment" and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s Sardar Associates & others v. Punjab & Sind Bank and Ors AIR 2010 SC 218; or

b) The representation dated 8.3.2010 (Annexure P9) whereby the calculations have been made by the petitioner on the basis of formula (a) referred to above may kindly be accepted after due consideration in view of the above law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:50:55 :::HCHP 2

c) the order dated 21.3.2007 (Annexure P8) may be quashed and set aside by declaring it null and void by way of issuance of a writ of certiorari.

2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, in my considered view in the facts and circumstances of the present case it is for the petitioners to approach the respondent-Bank for settlement under OTS policy. Mr. S.C. Sharma, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2 has also submitted that in case petitioners do approach the Bank with an offer of which falls within the parameters of the OTS policy then the respondent-

Bank shall not be having any problem to settle the matter in consonance rt with what is contemplated in the OTS policy.

3. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioners to approach the respondent-Bank with their offer within a period of four weeks from today for settlement under OTS policy and in case petitioners do approach the respondent-Bank in this regard then the respondent-Bank shall take a decision with regard to the offer made by petitioners as per the terms of the OTS policy within a period of six weeks thereafter.

With the said observation, the writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. No order as to cost.

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge 20th July, 2016.

(Guleria) ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:50:55 :::HCHP 3 .

of rt ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:50:55 :::HCHP

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court