SMT. SIMA PRANAMI v. SRI JITENDRA MASAND,PRESCRIBED AUTH./CHIEF MANAGER ASSET RECOVERY MGMT.BRANCH(INDIAN BANK) AND ANR.
CAPL/41/2025 · 2025-02-18
Manish Kumar
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 114687 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 114687 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10599 Court No. - 17 Case :- CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 41 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Sima Pranami Opposite Party :- Sri Jitendra Masand,Prescribed Auth./Chief Manager Asset Recovery Mgmt.Branch(Indian Bank) And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Birendra Pratap Singh,Pankaj Shukla Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J. Vakalatnama filed by Sri Anurag Srivastava, Advocate on behalf of respondent nos. 1 & 2 is taken on record. Compliance affidavit filed by respondent no. 2 is also taken on record.
Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that as per the direction of the writ Court, the draft for refund of the auction amount deposited by the auction purchaser at MCLR plus 1 %, has already been prepared on 22.03.2024, which the applicant has refused to accept and demanded for payment of compound interest for which there is no direction by the writ Court. It is further submitted that the validity of the draft is for the period of three months only, so the same draft has been re- validated on 14.02.2025. On the contrary, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the Bank was showing the draft but pressurising the applicant to clear the loan amount against the NPA account only then the draft will be given, which is denied by learned counsel for the respondent. After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant i.e. Smt. Sima Pranami is present and she is ready to accept the draft, without there being any condition. The draft is handed over to the applicant i.e. Smt. Sima Pranami, who is present in the Court and has been identified by his counsel Sri Birendra Pratap Singh.
Learned counsel for the applicant has very fairly submitted that the judgment and order passed by the writ court has been complied with and for all practical purposes, the present contempt application has become infructuous and the same may be dismissed as infructuous.
In view of above, the present contempt application is dismissed as infructuous. Notice issued earlier, if any, stands discharged.
Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Nitesh Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench