1 / 3 2025:CGHC:10042 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1862 of 2022 1 - Smt. Sushmita Mishra W/o Late Rajendra Kumar Mishra Aged About 58 Years R/o Govind B-3, Krishna Nagar, Bhatapara , Tahsil And Police Station Bhatapara , District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 2 - Yashu Mishra D/o Late Rajendra Kumar Mishra Aged About 20 Years R/o Govind B-3, Krishna Nagar, Bhatapara , Tahsil And Police Station Bhatapara , District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 3 - Priyanshu Mishra D/o Late Rajendra Kumar Mishra Aged About 18 Years R/o Govind B-3, Krishna Nagar, Bhatapara , Tahsil And Police Station Bhatapara , District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Bank Of Baroda Through Chief Manager / Authorized Officer, Regional Office, Bank Of Baroda , Near L.I.C. Office, Pandari, Raipur, Police Station Pandari, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Branch Manager, Bank Of Baroda Bhatapara, Tahsil Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Anil Kumar Trivedi S/o Late Shri Prabhudayal Trivedi Aged About 55 Years R/o Rawatpura Nagar, Mathpuraina , Raipur, Police Station Civil Line, Tahsil And District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) 2 / 3 For Petitioners : Mr. Tarendra Kumar Jha, Advocate For Respondents No.1 & 2: Mr. Ankit Singhal, Advocate (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 28/02/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioners are seeking a direction towards the respondent bank to refund the amount of Rs.3,50,000/- with interest, as the petitioners have deposited the same in pursuance to the order dated 05/05/2015 passed in WPC No.558/2015. 2. Earlier the petitioners filed WPC No.558/2015 questioning the proceedings which were drawn by the respondent bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and in the said writ petition, this Court has directed the petitioners to deposit an amount of Rs.3,50,000/- and the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners. Subsequently the petitioner No.3 herein (daughter of the petitioner No.1) purchased the property in question pursuance to the auction made by the respondent bank. Hence as the proceeding for which the amount was directed to be deposited by this Court is not in existence at this stage and the property which has been purchased by the petitioner No.3, the amount deposited by the petitioner be refunded back with interest. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank would submit that after the subsequent development, the petitioner never approached the bank for refund of the amount of Rs.3,50,000/- which has been deposited pursuance to the order of this Court. 3 / 3 He would submit that if the petitioner will approach the bank, the bank will take necessary steps, in accordance with law, for refund of the aforesaid amount, as the same has been kept in a separate account. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5. Considering the aforesaid submission made by both the parties, the petitioners are directed to approach the respondent bank for refund of amount of Rs.3,50,000/- and in the event, the petitioner submits an application for the said purpose, the bank authorities shall consider and take appropriate steps for refund of amount of Rs.3,50,000/- to the petitioners with interest, if any, in accordance with law, at the earliest possible preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of approaching the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE Gowri/ $. Bhilwar