HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 8840 of 2025 Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. Order on I.A. No.NIL; Dated:24.09.2025: 1. The amendment application has been filed today in Court which is taken on record. 2. Through the amendment application, the petitioner is also challenging order dated 13.09.2024 passed by DRT, Allahabad in S.A. No.595 of 2024 (Smt. Nirmala v. Authorized Officer, State Bank of India). 3. The application is allowed. 4. Petitioner is permitted to make necessary amendment in the prayer clause during the course of the day. Order on Writ Petition: 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Suresh Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent. 6. Present petition has been filed for the following relief: "I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing to the respondent no.6 (State Bank of India through its Branch Manager, Branch - Herringtonganj, District - Ayodhya) to recalculate outstanding loan amount by adjusting money which already paid by the petitioner and allow the petitioner to pay the corrected outstanding loan in easy Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vindeshwri Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anurag Srivastava, Suresh Chandra Pandey Smt. Nirmala Devi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) installments." 7. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that while passing the order dated 13.09.2024, the DRT had recorded the readiness and willingness of the petitioner to settle the matter with the respondent/Bank and in that respect, the DRT had granted certain benefits in the form of restraining the bank from taking physical possession of the property till 17.09.2024. 8. It is stated that out of the amounts mentioned by the DRT, part deposits could be made and the rest part could not be disputed and now the bank is threatening to take possession of the property. 9. Learned counsel for the respondent states that challenging an order passed under Section 14 against the petitioner, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing Writ - C No.4653 of 2025 in which an order was passed on 20.05.2025 relegating the petitioner to avail the remedy available before the Tribunal itself. 10. It also transpires from the submission of the respondent that some settlement was arrived at in between the parties at Lok Adalat, however, even the said could not be honored. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has filed an application before the DRT, Allahabad on 01.08.2025, however, as the DRT, Allahabad is not sitting regularly, the application is not being taken up. It is stated that the matters from DRT, Allahabad are generally transferred to DRT, Lucknow for adjudication and in view thereof, no orders are being passed on the said application. 12. Considering the fact that this Court had relegated the petitioner to avail the remedy before the DRT and the DRT, Allahabad is not sitting, present petition is disposed off permitting the petitioner to file an application online before DRT, Lucknow for taking up the matter i.e. I.A. filed in S.A. No.595 of 2024 on 01.08.2025. 13. The said application shall be disposed off within a period of three weeks from today. WRIC No. 8840 of 2025 2 14. Till the disposal of the application, no steps for forceful eviction of the petitioner shall take place. September 24, 2025 nishant WRIC No. 8840 of 2025 3 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench