Mihir Kumar Sakhuja vs State Of H.P. And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 2577 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
                                                         CWP No. 4424 of 2019
                                                         Decided on: 07.04.2021




                                                                                      .

        Mihir Kumar Sakhuja                                                       .......Petitioner

                                                     Versus





        State of H.P. and others                                             ......Respondents


        Coram




        The Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice.
        The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Judge.

        Whether approved for reporting?1

        For the petitioner:                        Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate.


        For the respondents:                       Mr. Ashok Sharma, A.G with
                                                   Ms. Ritta Goswami and Mr.
                                                   Adarsh Sharma, Addl. A.Gs for
                                                   the respondent-State.




                                                   Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate





                                                   for respondents No. 4 &
                                                   5/bank.





         L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice (Oral)

The first prayer of the petitioner is for a direction

to the State Government to investigate case FIR No. 143 of

2017 against the respondent-bank or its employees and file

the challan after investigation. The second prayer is for a

direction to the respondent-bank to accept the case of the

Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

petitioner for One Time Settlement (OTS) of the outstanding

amount.

.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent-bank has

submitted to dismiss the writ petition on two grounds. Firstly,

that the matter with regard to same issue is pending before

the Debt Recovery Tribunal and against an order passed by

the Debt Recovery Tribunal, the petitioner himself has

approached the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal.

submitted that when the proceedings are pending before a

competent Court, the petitioner should not have approached It is

this Court by filing the present petition. On this ground also,

this petition deserves to be dismissed. It is further submitted

that as per notice dated 18.01.2021 Annexure A-1, the

demand was raised by the respondent-bank to pay

`10,38,100/-.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

petitioner is ready and willing to pay the entire amount within

the stipulated period and today, in the Court, has handed over

demand draft amounting to `1,03,810/-, which is 10% of the

total amount as per notice dated 18.01.2021. The same is

accepted by learned counsel for the respondent-bank and

handed over to the official of the bank, who is present before

this Court. Further, learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that the petitioner would deposit the remaining amount within

10 days from today.

.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent-bank submits

that in case petitioner deposits the entire amount within 10

days from today, then the notice issued in reference to the

loan account of the petitioner will be withdrawn. Further,

learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has

5.

r to deposited an amount of `5,75,000/- to the account of one

Ashwani Kumar, who according to him, is a third party.

In view of the above submissions, the writ petition

is disposed of by directing the petitioner to deposit the entire

loan amount on or before 24th April, 2021. Though, the OTS

scheme ended on 31st March, 2021, under these

circumstances, we direct the respondent-bank to extend the

Scheme till 24th April, 2021, only in case of petitioner, as it is

submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the

petitioner is suffering from skin cancer. On clearance of the

entire amount on or before 24th April, 2021, the respective

parties are directed to make such submissions before the

Debt Recovery Tribunal or Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal.

After the clearance of entire loan amount, the respondent-

bank is directed to return the title deed immediately to the

petitioner.

6. So far as the submissions of the petitioner

regrading deposit of `5,75,000/- is concerned, the petitioner is

.

at liberty to raise such objections by filing necessary

application/appeal, whichever is permissible under the Act,

including approaching the Reserve Bank of India against the

impugned action. Pending application(s), if any, shall also

stand disposed of.

Copy dasti.

                         r         to        ( L. Narayana Swamy )
                                                   Chief Justice

    April 07, 2021                              ( Anoop Chitkara )
         (naveen)                                     Judge