Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18652 (ALL)

GHANSHYAM RAM v. BANK OF MAHARASHTRA, ZONAL OFFICE GOMTI NAGAR, OPPOSITE LDA OFFICE, LUCKNOW

WRIC/4270/2025 · 2025-04-06

Rajeev Singh, Sangeeta Chandra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4270 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ghanshyam Ram Respondent :- Bank Of Maharashtra, Zonal Office Gomti Nagar, Opposite Lda Office, Lucknow Counsel for Petitioner :- Afzal Parvej,Arif Ikbal Counsel for Respondent :- Amrish Sahai Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Amrish Sahai, learned counsel for the bank. This petition has been filed with the following prayer :- "(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned Demand Notice dated 23.9.2024 issued by the respondent bank under SARFAESI Act, 2002 against the petitioner (Annexure No.1 to this writ petition). (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the ntaure of Mandamus directing the respondent bank not to take any coercive measure against the petitioner for recovery of the amount mentioned in the impugned Demand notice dated 23.9.2024 issued by the respondent Bank under SARFAESI Act, 2002 (Annexure No.1 of the writ petition). (iii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing to the respondent bank till the disposal of the objection filed by the petitioner under Section 13(3)A of the Act not to take any coercive measure against the petitioner. (iv) Issue any other writ order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is ready to pay the dues as indicated by the bank in its demand notice under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act and also respond in this regard to the bank. Learned counsel for the respondent bank has produced before this Court order dated 3.12.2024 passed by the Chief Manager/Authorized Officer, Bank of Maharashtra, Lucknow Regional Office, Lucknow, wherein Bank has rejected the representation of the petitioner by saying that since the time loan has taken by the petitioner, he has not paid a single installment and in S.A. No.829/2022, he has stated on oath that he will deposit Rs.5,00,000/- which also has not deposited. The order dated 3.12.2024 is taken on record. With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed with the liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 Gaurav Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad