Patna High Court - Orders
Prajun Kumar Karn vs The State Bank Of India Through The ... on 15 January, 2019
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1095 of 2019
======================================================
Prajun Kumar Karn aged about 29 years, (Male0 son of Sri Arun Kumar
Karn, R/o Station Road, Krishnapalli, Khuskibagh, District- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Bank Of India through The Branch Manager , Khushkibagh
Branch, Purnea
2. The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Khushkibagh Branch, Purnea
3. The Regional Manager, State Bank of India, Regional Office, Purnea
4. The Asstt. General Manager, (RACPC), Regional Office, Purnea
5.The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, Head Office, Gandhi
Maidan, Patna
6. Om Jai Real Care (OJRC) Pvt. Ltd, (Recovery Agent), Madhepura, Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N. K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Kumar Praveen, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Rakesh Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2019Mr. Nawal Kishore Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel representing the petitioner has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure-3 dated 07.12.2018 and submits that by the said intimation the Bank had called upon the petitioner to regularise the Account, failing which the Bank would have been constrained to initiate appropriate action. The communication at Annexure-3 shows that the Account was irregular by Rs. 3,23,735/-.
Learned Senior Counsel further submits that prior to issuance of Annexure-3, the Bank had taken forceful possession of the vehicle in question with the help of its recovery agent who in turn employed muscle man to take forceful possession of Patna High Court CWJC No.1095 of 2019(2) dt.15-01-2019 2/3 the vehicle from the petitioner when it was on way. The recovery agent took possession of the vehicle on 28.11.2018.
Learned Senior Counsel submits that at this stage when the petitioner is willing to comply with the direction to regularise the Account, as called for by the Bank vide Annexure-3, the Bank is not agreeing to the same and is insisting for payment of the entire Loan amount.
Learned Senior Counsel submits that in terms of the agreement, the entire amount is re-payable by the year 2022 and it would not be possible for the petitioner to make entire payment in one go. It is further submitted that prior to the letter dated 07.12.2018 (Annexure-3) the Bank had never served any notice recalling the entire loan and if it is so, at this stage the Bank cannot put a condition for repayment of the entire loan.
Learned counsel representing the Bank submits that presently he has no instruction as to what has been submitted by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner. He prays for two weeks' time to come up with instruction and a counter affidavit.
Let this matter be listed on 29th of January, 2019. In the meantime, if the petitioner deposits the entire amount by which the Account is irregular till today, the Bank shall accept the payment and shall provisionally release the Patna High Court CWJC No.1095 of 2019(2) dt.15-01-2019 3/3 vehicle. It will be subject to result of the writ application.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) avin/-
U