SMT. VIMLA SAXENA AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
WRIC/6154/2025 · 2025-03-02
Siddhartha Varma, Y K Srivastava
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 20209 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 20209 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29146-DB Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6154 of 2025 Petitioner :- Smt. Vimla Saxena And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Babul Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Gyan Prakash Shrivastava Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
1. Case taken up in the revised call.
2. No one has appeared on behalf of the petitioners even though Sri Gyan Prakash Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondents is present.
3. From the record we find that on 06.03.2024 this Court had passed the following order:
"1. The petitioners have challenged the notice dated 03.02.2024 issued by respondent-bank under Section 13(4) of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are ready to pay the entire outstanding amount along with interest in easy installments.
3. Sri G.P. Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent- bank, submits that the bank is ready to accept the money in installments.
4. Accordingly and with consent of the learned counsel for parties, the petition is disposed of as follows:- (a). The petitioners will deposit 20 per cent of the outstanding amount before respondent-Bank as upfront money by 20.03.2024; (b). The remaining amount will be deposited by the petitioners in three equal
bi-monthly installments so that the entire liability is cleared within next six months; (c). In case of default, in complying with the conditions stipulated above the instant arrangement will stand automatically discharged and it shall become open to the respondent-Bank to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law."
4. It has been informed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that this order had not been honoured and also no request had been made by the petitioners for the extension of time before the appropriate Court.
5. Under such circumstances, no interference is warranted.
6. The writ petition is accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 M.S. Ansari (Dr. Y.K. Srivastava,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD SAQIB ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad