Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 193430 (ALL)

SHYAMO DEVI v. UCO BANK, BRANCH NAKUR DISTRICT SAHARANPUR THROUGH (BRANCH MANAGER)

WRIC/35443/2025 · 2025-10-16

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 35443 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Shri Kanhaiya Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sanjai Singh, learned counsel for bank. 2. Petitioner is willing to pay outstanding Rs. 9,65, 684/- being claimed by the bank, however, she prays for time for the reason that the loan had been availed by her husband who died on 29.09.2021. She claims to be 58 year old lady with no real independent income. Therefore, she prays for accommodation to pay up the loan in one year's time. It is also stated that besides the secured asset under threat of auction, the petitioner does not have any other residential property. 3. On the other hand learned counsel for the bank would submit that hardships of the petitioner apart, he does not have instructions to allow for repayment of the outstanding amount over a period of one year. 4. In view of the said facts, no useful purpose will be served in keeping this petition pending and calling for counter affidavit, at this stage. 5. Subject to the petitioner showing her bona fides by depositing Rs.2,65,684/- on or before 15.11.2025, the petitioner may approach the respondent bank by means of a written representation praying for accommodation. 6. Subject to such compliance made, the respondent bank will consider the case of the present petitioner sympathetically after ascertaining the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kanhaiya Mishra, Sandeep Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : Sanjai Singh Shyamo Devi .....Petitioner(s) Uco Bank, Branch Nakur District Saharanpur Through (Branch Manager) .....Respondent(s) correctness of the grounds being pressed by the petitioner. Thus, if it is found true that she has no means of independent income, as may allow her shorter period of time to repay the loan, the request being made by the petitioner to grant her larger period of time may be considered, keeping in mind the bank policy which may involve waiver of interest on the delay in repayment. Such decision may be taken within a period of fifteen days from the date of representation being filed. Copy of that order may also be communicated to the petitioner within a further period of one week therefrom. 7. Subject to such compliance being made, for a period of two months from today or till the disposal of the representation of the petitioner by the respondent bank, coercive measures initiated by the respondent bank may be kept in abeyance. October 17, 2025 Nadeem WRIC No. 35443 of 2025 2 (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- NADEEM AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad