Uttarakhand High Court
3 November vs Punjab National Bank Regional Office & ... on 13 November, 2024
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2024:UHC:8432
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 2232 of 2024
13 November, 2024
Rajkumar Jain
--Petitioner
Versus
Punjab National Bank Regional Office & others
--Respondents
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Shobhit Joshi, learned counsel holding brief of Mr.
Ashish Joshi, learned counsel for respondent nos.1 & 2.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. By means of the present writ petition,
petitioner has sought the indulgence of this Court for
issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding the
respondent-Bank to permit the petitioner to complete his
tenancy period of the said land i.e. secured assets and
further not to adopt any coercive measures against the
petitioner, pursuant to the order dated 16.05.2023,
annexure-3 to the writ petition, issued by respondent
no.3-the Debt Recovery Tribunal, District Dehradun.
3. Admittedly, a loan was issued to the
respondent no.4-Urmila Devi, w/o Dharampal by the
respondent-Punjab National Bank. The respondent no.4,
who was the owner of the agriculture land, mortgaged the
land/property Agriculture Land totaling 2.739 hectare: (i)
2024:UHC:8432
Khasra No.1369/4, 1499/3m, 1987/2, 1989/2, 1497/m,
1498/1m, 1495/1, 1496/2, 1497, 1498/1, 1499/3,
1509/3, 1509/4, 1510/1 and 1514 total 2.262 hectare
situated at Ibrahampur, Masahi, Pargana Bhagwanpur,
Tehsil Roorkee, District Haridwar and (ii) Khasra No.210
area 0477 hectare situated at Rangarwala, Pargana
Roorkee, Tehsil Roorkee, District Haridwar, Uttarakhand
as secured assets. When the respondent no.4 failed to
repay the loan, the account of the petitioner has become
NPA (Non-Performing Asset).
4. The respondent-Bank initiated proceedings for
recovery of the loan amount along with interest accrued
thereon and filed an Original Application No.278 of 2019
under Section 18 of the Recovery of Debts and
Bankruptcy Act, 1993 before the DRT, Dehradun.
Undisputedly, learned DRT allowed the original
application filed by the respondent-Bank vide its
judgment and order dated 30.08.2019. On the
application of the respondent-Bank, learned DRT
initiated the recovery proceedings against the respondent
no.4 for total outstanding amount of Rs.38,53,374.23/-.
In the RC proceedings, the DRT has sold the secured
assets in favour of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gupta and Mr.
Sanjay Kumar Gupta, who participated in the auction
conducted by the DRT itself.
5. The auction purchaser has deposited the total
amount outstanding against the borrower before the DRT
and the Bank has taken that amount. Thereafter, the
receiver was appointed for giving possession of the
secured assets to the auction purchaser. In between, an
application has been moved by the petitioner stating
therein that the petitioner is the tenant of the secured
2024:UHC:8432
assets on a premium of Rs.3,60,000/- per year,
therefore, the possession cannot be handed over to the
auction purchaser.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not sure
as to what is happened to that application. Without
knowing the fate of the application or any order passed
on that application, petitioner moved this Court. The writ
petition filed by the petitioner lack in material
particulars, therefore, it is not possible to pass any order
in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is
dismissed in-limine.
7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of
accordingly.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
13.11.2024
AK
AVNEET
KAUR
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=a82175252dc1a0f53f0e245a1c11df9aa490cfd1403838bf52f9acab4cc3a5b9,
postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=5BEC18DADE54688668187E4D722C2EDBFDAF35AB2F676A551481BE62508FDDEE,
cn=AVNEET KAUR
Date: 2024.11.13 17:32:59 +05'30'
