Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court

Shailendra Kumar @ Shailendra vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 4 July, 2016

Author: Jyoti Saran

Bench: Jyoti Saran

        Patna High Court CWJC No.8845 of 2016 dt.04-07-2016




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8845 of 2016
             ===========================================================
             Shailendra Kumar @ Shailendra, Son of Shiv Prasad Roy, Resident of H. No. 554,
             Road No. 29, East Nehru Nagar, P.S.- Patliputra, District- Patna.
                                                                             .... .... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
             1. The State of Bihar, through Secretary, Department of Finance, Government of
                 Bihar, Patna.
             2. The State Bank of India, Raja Bazar, Shiekhpura, Patna through its Branch
                 Manager.
             3. The Branch Manager, the State Bank of India, Raja Bazar, Sheikhpura, Patna.
             4. The Authorised Officer, State Bank of India, Retail Assets Central Processing
                 Centre (RACPC), 1st Floor, Patna Main Branch Building, Patna-1.
             5. The Asst. General Manager, State Bank of India, RACPC, 1st Floor, Patna Main
                 Branch Building, Near Gandhi Maidan Patna-1.
                                                                            .... .... Respondent/s
             ===========================================================
                    Appearance :
                    For the Petitioner/s    : Mr. Lalan Kumar
                    For the Respondent/s    : Dr. Anil Kr. Upadhyaya, SC-20
             ===========================================================
             CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN
             ORAL JUDGMENT

Date: 04-07-2016 Counsel for the parties are present. The petitioner prays for damages for the harassment met at the hands of the respondent-Bank and the reason is steps taken by the bank to seize the hypothecated vehicle on failure of the petitioner to repay the loan. Even the cheque issued by the petitioner has bounced.

The writ petition is held not maintainable in the circumstances discussed and the petitioner if so advised can take recourse to the civil law remedy as may be available to him in law for espousing his claim.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

(Jyoti Saran, J) SKPathak/-

NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 05-07-2916 Transmission Date