1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Karuti Singh vs Central Bank Of India Aligarh

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 April, 2019
Court No. - 49
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36947 of 2013 Petitioner :- Karuti Singh Respondent :- Central Bank Of India Aligarh Counsel for Petitioner :- A.L. Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- G.P. Srivastava,S.C.
Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsels for the parties.
The petitioner, by means of this writ petition is requesting for exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the demand notice dated 30.05.2013, whereby, he has been asked to deposit back the amount of Rs. 1,25,706/- along with interest, as dues towards the bank, in view of his Kisan Credit Card Account transactions that was earlier in operation since 05.06.2003.
The argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is that besides Kisan Credit Card, he had also taken one more loan. The petitioner has further relied upon a discharge certificate dated 14.03.2009 in which it is shown that the entire amount has been paid. Counter affidavit has been filed by the Bank in which statement of account has been annexed of Kisan Credit Card and it is shown from the statement of accounts that on 24.05.2008 and 31.05.2008, the petitioner had withdrawn Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 20,000/- from the account and that amount in its entirety has not been deposited back and consequently the said account has been rendered as Non Performing Asset (NPA) Account. The petitioner countering the same, submits that once the bank had issued 'no dues certificate' in the sense a discharge certificate has been issued in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner cannot be saddled with the liability of a defaulter towards the loan taken from the bank. It is further argued that the petitioner has also been entitled to the loan waiver scheme of the State Government and therefore, even otherwise, the account should have been settled by the bank.
Learned counsel for the Bank has vehemently opposed the writ petition and has drawn the attention of the Court to the discharge certificate in which loan account referred to is different from the one in which demand notice in question has been issued.
Having heard learned counsels for the parties and having perused the record, I find that as far as the Kisan Credit Card Account is concerned, it shows that there has been operation of the account till 24.09.2009 and the debit and credit columns clearly demonstrate that the petitioner had withdrawn, between 24.05.2008 and 24.09.2009, Rs. 50,000/-, Rs. 20,000/- and after further transfer amount of Rs. 3,906/-, Rs. 4,113/- and Rs. 4,403 have taken place but there is no credit in the said account at the end of the petitioner except for Rs. 1,913/- by cash on 30.07.2008. The period of statement of account that has been filed in the counter affidavit is upto 06.03.2010, whereas, the discharge certificate is of 14.03.2009, learned counsel for the respondents is right in submitting that this discharge certificate is in respect of a different loan account no. CKCC268 and it is in that respect that after settling the dues, the discharge certificate has been issued, whereas, the demand notice is in respect of KCC 28 which is of Rs. 70,000/- and which is absolutely a different account. This above is clearly apparent from the perusal of the two documents.
In the considered opinion of the Court, since the petitioner has come against a demand notice and has not denied specifically the statement of account that has been brought on record by the bank by means of counter affidavit, it is hereby provided that the petitioner shall raise his grievance before the respondent within a period of three weeks from today in writing, taking all such plea regarding payment of dues that he has done in the past relating to the account in respect of which the demand notice has been issued. The Bank shall consider the same and before further proceeding in the matter, shall provide a statement of account afresh to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. It is made clear that until such decision is taken by the Bank and afresh statement of account is issued, no coercive measure shall be taken by the Bank pursuant to demand notice dated 13.05.2013.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 IrfanUddin
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
  • Ajit Kumar
  • A L Gupta