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 0, Cited by 14]

Chattisgarh High Court

Mukesh Kumar Agrawal vs The Jammu And Kashmir Bank Ltd. 17 ... on 29 January, 2018

Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal

Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal

                                                       1

                                                                                           NAFR

                         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                      Writ Petition (C) No. 169 of 2018

                   Mukesh Kumar Agrawal, S/o Shri Suresh Kumar Agrawal, aged about 32
                   years, R/o Ramkunj Niwas Bhainsthan, Agresen Marg, Raipur (C.G.)
                                                                          ---- Petitioner

                                                   Versus

                1. The Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. Through its Branch Manager, Raipur
                   Branch, District Raipur (C.G.)

                2. R.K. Jain Construction, through its Proprietor, Shri Vikas Jain, Raipur District
                   Raipur (C.G.)



           For Petitioners              :      Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate.

                                  Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

                                              Order On Board

           29/01/18

           1.      Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the entire loan
           amount has been paid by the petitioner to the respondent No. 2 and even

the housing construction has been constructed, therefore, the recovery of the loan amount be stopped and it be returned to the petitioner.

2. Be that as it may, the petitioner is at liberty to make a representation before the respondent No. 1 who shall consider the grievance of the petitioner and take a decision on it expeditiously within a period of four weeks from the date of copy of representation along with certified copy of this order.

3. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka