WPMS/1076/2025
2025 Latest Caselaw 3870 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

WPMS/1076/2025 on 25 April, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

               Office N ot e s,
        Date      r e por t s,
                 or de r s or                   COURT'S OR JUD GE'S ORD ERS
               pr oce e dings
               or dir e ct ions
                      a nd
                Re gist r a r 's
                or de r w it h
                Sign a t u r e s
D/ 20                              WPMS No.1076 of 2025
                                   Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State/respondent no.2. Mr. Hemant Singh Dangwal, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Siddharth Jain, Advocate for respondent nos.3 to 5. The petitioner took loan for running an Educational Institution, but the EMI could not be paid due to drop in the strength of students during COVID-19 period. When recovery proceeding was initiated, the petitioner applied for re-structuring the loan, it was denied by the respondent bank. A writ petition was filed and was dismissed. But, in the special appeal, directions were given to the petitioner to regularize the loan account by paying the arrears of the equated monthly instalments EMI that having fallen view after rate of interest introduced the EMI for the pending month of April, 2025. In the special appeal it was further observed, "The total sum shall be calculated and delay charges and the simple interest also may be calculated and the amount be deposited by 10th April, 2025. In the event, such amount is deposited with the Bank, the Banker shall receive and consider the Application for re- structuring of the loan in accordance with law."

The amount was so calculated, it is now challenged in the instant petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the break-up of the amount has to be given so as to assess, as to what was the actual amount of the EMI? What was the interest calculated? How it was calculated?

As soon as the matter is taken up, the Court wanted to know from the learned counsel for the petitioner, as to what is an amount due according to the petitioner in terms of the order passed by the Court in the Special Appeal No.30 of 2025? At it, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to get instructions.

List on 29.04.2024.

On 29.04.2024, the statement shall also be given on behalf of the petitioner, as to what is the amount that is due to the respondent bank in view of the judgment and order dated 21.03.2025, passed in the special appeal.

Learned counsel for the respondent bank may also get instructions with regard of the break-up of the amount that has been calculated by the bank.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 25.04.2025 Sanjay