Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/1572/2021 on 12 August, 2021
Office Notes, reports,
orders or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions and COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
Registrar's order with
Signatures
WPMS No.1572 of 2021
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
(Through Hybrid Mode)
Mr. B.S. Koranga, Advocate for the
petitioner.
Mr. M.S. Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of
Uttarakhand.
Mr. Mahendra Singh Rawat, Advocate for
respondent no.3.
The petitioner was sanctioned a financial
assistance by the respondent-bank for the purposes
of procuring mules for agricultural purposes.
The said loan stood sanctioned in favour of
the petitioner way back in 2013. He committed a
default in the remittance of the amount as per the
terms of the loan agreement. Hence, the recovery
citation dated 30.04.2019, was issued against him
for the recovery of an outstanding amount of
Rs.3,62,603/-.
Challenging the said recovery citation, the
petitioner has earlier preferred a writ petition being
Writ Petition (M/S) No.3322 of 2019 Lalu Ram
vs. State of Uttarakhand and others. The
Coordinate Bench of this Court, considering the
financial constraints of the petitioner and on a
consent extended by the counsels for the bank
therein had disposed of the writ petition with the
following directions:-
"3. With the consent of all the parties, the
matter stands disposed of with the following
directions:-
The petitioner shall deposit an amount of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only)
with the bank within a 2 period of one month
from today i.e. on or before 23.11.2019. In
case the amount is deposited on or before
23.11.2019, the respondent-bank would then
recover the remaining amount from the
petitioner in twenty four equal monthly
installments spreading over a period of two
years. It is made clear that recovery shall not
include recovery charges.
4. It is directed that the last installment shall
also carry cumulative interest. It is further
made clear that in default of payment of any
single installment, the Bank shall be at liberty
to initiate fresh process for recovery against
the petitioner."
The petitioner after passing of the judgment
fixing the instalments on 23.10.2019, has yet again
defaulted in the remittance of the amount.
Consequently, a fresh recovery citation dated
10.07.2021, was issued against the petitioner for
recovering the amount of Rs.2,95,368/- which still
falls due to be paid by the petitioner, on account of
the fact that he has committed a default in
complying with the directions which were given by
the Coordinate Bench, in its judgment of
23.10.2019.
The petitioner cannot be permitted to take an
advantage of his own fault. Once as against the
recovery proceedings, he has already approached
the writ court, and the writ court while exercising
its equitable jurisdiction has entertained the writ
petition on the consent of the bank's counsel by
fixing instalments and if thereafter the petitioner
has committed any default in payment of the
instalments, as it was contained in para 4 of the
judgment of 23.10.2019, quite obviously the entire
amount would fall due to be recovered from the
petitioner.
Hence, the present recovery citation which
has been issued, is as a consequence of the default
which was committed by the petitioner in
complying with the judgment dated 23.10.2019.
Hence, this writ petition would amount to be a
second writ petition, as against the same cause of
action of recovery, which was initiated against the
petitioner for the loan advances taken by him in
2013. Since the present writ petition being second
writ petition and the recovery citation issued on
10.07.2021, was on account of the default
committed by the petitioner, the implications of
para 4 of the earlier judgment were bound to
follow. Hence, the present recovery citation, is as a
consequence of the non-compliance of the earlier
judgment, the subsequent writ petition will amount
to be a second writ petition, which is successive in
nature that cannot be sustained and the same is
accordingly dismissed.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
12.08.2021
Arti
