Sunday, 10, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

WPMS/431/2018
2021 Latest Caselaw 2212 UK

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 2212 UK
Judgement Date : 2 July, 2021

Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/431/2018 on 2 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                      AT NAINITAL
           ON THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2021
                            BEFORE:
 HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI


       WRITPETITION (M/S) No. 431 of 2018

BETWEEN:

Vijender Singh.                                     ...Petitioner
       (There is no representation for the petitioner)

AND:
Regional Manager,
Canara Bank and another.                       ....Respondents

       (By Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate)


                         JUDGMENT

Petitioner took a housing loan of ` 15,00,000/- from Canara Bank, Branch Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal. Since, he defaulted in re-payment of loan, therefore, proceedings for recovery of outstanding amount was initiated against him under the provisions of SARFAESI Act.

2. In the present writ petition, petitioner has challenged auction notice dated 21.01.2018 issued by Regional Manager, Canara Bank, Dehradun.

3. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 20.02.2018 had stayed the auction notice dated 21.01.2018 qua the petitioner, provided he deposits a sum of ` 2,00,000/- with the respondent-Bank on or before 21.02.2018 and further amount of ` 5,00,000/-

within a period of one month thereafter i.e. on or before 21.03.2018.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Bank has made a statement that, in deference to the interim order passed by this Court, the secured asset of the petitioner mortgaged with the respondent-Bank was not put to auction. He however submits that, since petitioner has not deposited the amount as directed, thus has violated order of this Court, therefore, a fresh auction notice has now been issued and secured asset of the petitioner is now again being put to auction, which is scheduled for 15.07.2021.

5. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank, the relief, as claimed in the writ petition, cannot be granted.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is dismissed.

7. There will be no order as to costs.

(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.) Arpan

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter