M/S. Budhu Mini Rice Mill vs Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, Now ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5135 Patna

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11525 of 2021
     ======================================================

M/s. Budhu Mini Rice Mill through its Proprietor Most. Nagvnti, Kuwar (female), aged about 40 years, wife of Late Birendra Singh, resident of Village - Panditpura, P.O.- Akorha, District - Rohtas (Bihar).

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, now South Bihar Gramin Bank through its Chairman, Vishnu Commercial Complex, beside National Highway Petrol Pump, Aso Chak, Patna - 800013.

2. The Regional Manager, Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, now South Bihar Gramin Bank, Regional Office, Sasaram, District - Rohtas.

3. The Branch Manager, Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank, Branch Office, now South Bihar Gramin Bank, Dinara Branch, District - Rohtas, Bihar.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

     For the Petitioner/s   :    Mr.Saroj Kumar
     For the Respondent/s   :    Mr.Manoranjan Kumar Mishra
                                 Mr. Shiv Pratap

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 01-11-2021

Heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned.

2. The petitioner has preferred this writ application

against the order, dated 06.02.2017, passed by the Presiding

Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna, in O.A. No. 510 of 2016,

by which a Recovery Certificate for a sum of R. 29,30,927/- has

been issued against the petitioner along with pendente lite and

future interest at contractual rate. The petitioner has also prayed

for quashing the recovery certificate issued for the recovery of Rs.

29,30,927/-.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11525 of 2021 dt.01-11-2021

3. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the

respondents-Bank submits that under Section 20 of the Recovery

of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, against any order passed by

the Debts Recovery Tribunal, an appeal is maintainable before the

appellate authority having jurisdiction in the matter, but the

petitioner, instead of preferring an appeal, has challenged the order

passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal and the recovery certificate

before this Court, which is not maintainable. He placed the order,

dated 06.10.2021, passed in R. P. Case No. 116 of 2017 and from

perusal of the same, it appears that an offer was made by the

certificate debtor before the Recovery Officer showing their

intention to pay the certificate amount and in order to show their

bona fide, the certificate debtor has deposited a sum of Rs.

15,00,000/- before the Recovery Officer.

4. Learned Counsel for the respondent-Bank further

submits that in view of the offer made by the certificate debtor, the

Chief Manager of the respondent-bank admitted that they would

consider the proposal of the certificate debtor sympathetically if

they come with such proposal and accordingly, the Recovery

Officer granted time to the petitioner to approach the concerned

bank for compromise and kept the matter for further recovery

proceeding on 02.11.2021. He, referring to the order, dated Patna High Court CWJC No.11525 of 2021 dt.01-11-2021

29.09.2021, passed by the Recovery Officer, submits that in view

of the fact that the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.

15,00,000/- before the Recovery Officer, the e-auction of the

mortgaged property of the petitioner could not be held.

5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, in reply, submits

that the Bank Officials are not responding and the petitioner is still

ready to deposit the entire certificate amount along with simple

interest.

6. Regards being had to the submissions advanced on

behalf of the parties concerned and in view of the fact that the

recovery order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal is

appellable before the appellate authority and the certificate of

recovery is already the subject matter before the Recovery Officer,

in R.P. Case No. 116 of 2017, in my opinion, this writ application

is not maintainable.

7. However, considering the offer made by the petitioner

to deposit the entire certificate amount along with simple interest,

it will be open to the Bank as well as the Recovery officer to

consider the same in accordance with law and taking into

consideration the fact that the petitioner is a widow.

8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ

application is disposed.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11525 of 2021 dt.01-11-2021

9. There shall be no order as to costs.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/-

AFR/NAFR                         NAFR
CAV DATE                          N/A
Uploading Date                03-11-2021
Transmission Date                 N/A