Abha Prasad vs The State Bank Of India Through Its Chief ... on 12 October, 2019

[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Jharkhand High Court

Abha Prasad vs The State Bank Of India Through Its Chief ... on 12 October, 2019

Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                     W.P.(C) No.4575 of 2018
                          ---------

1. Abha Prasad

2. Sunita Prasad

3. Rajan Prasad ......... Petitioners Versus

1. The State Bank of India through its Chief Manager, SAM Branch, Patna, Bihar

2. The Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, SAM Branch, Patna, Bihar

3. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, SME Branch, Bank More, Dhanbad .......... Respondents

---------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

---------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sumir Prasad, Advocate For the Resp.-Bank : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate

---

6/12.10.2019 The writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby and whereunder the proposal of the petitioners for settlement of the loan account having been rejected, has been sought to be quashed.

Mr. Sumir Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset on instruction, submits that the matter pertaining to settlement of the loan account, is under consideration before the concerned authority of the respondent bank, therefore, leave has been sought for to pursue the said application.

Mr. Ranjan Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent-Bank, however, has not objected to such submission but he has raised the question of maintainability of the writ petition on the ground of availability of remedy available under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, since according to him, after issuance of notice under Section 13 of the Act, 2002, the petitioners can well approach before the Tribunal as per the provision provided under Section 17 of the Act, 2002.

This Court after having heard the learned counsel for the parties and without entering into the merit of the claim of the petitioners as also considering the submission made on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner to the effect, the petitioners want to pursue their grievance before the respondent-Bank for settlement of the loan account, deem it fit and proper to dispose of the writ petition by according said liberty to the petitioners to approach before the respondent-Bank.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) Rohit/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court