THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM v. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND 2 ORS

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5166/2025 DIPANKAR MAZUMDER S/O LATE SUNIL CHANDRA MAZUMDER, R/O CHANDRAPUR, A.A. ROAD, OPPOSITE RAJARSHI MOTORS, AGARTALA-799007, TRIPURA WEST VERSUS THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH (SARB), BAMUNIMAIDAM, MRD ROAD, GUWAHATI-781021, KAMRUP (M) 2:THE AUTHORISED OFFICER STATE BANK OF INDIA STRESSED ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH (SARB) BAMUNIMAIDAM MRD ROAD GUWAHATI-781021 KAMRUP (M) 3:THE BRANCH MANAGER AGARTALA BRANCH STATE BANK OF INDIA HARI GANGA BASAK ROAD DHALESWAR AGARTALA TRIPURA-79900 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S DAS, P J DAS Advocate for the Respondent : , Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY Date : 08.09.2025 ORDER

Heard Mr. P.J. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. G Das, learned counsel for the respondent Bank.

The wife of the petitioner who is the proprietor of M/s Maitri Traders, availed a loan facility wherein the present petitioner was a guarantor. The borrower wife failed to pay the dues in time, and therefore, the loan account was declared as NPA. Recovery proceeding under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 was filed by the Bank which was registered as OA No.414/2015 wherein, the learned DRT issued a recovery certificate in favour of the respondent Bank.

The matter is pending at present before the Recovery Officer, DRT, Guwahati for recovery of the dues.

The petitioner raising certain difficulties including his health condition has approached this court for an one time settlement.

In the considered opinion of this court, this court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may not issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Bank to positively grant one time settlement inasmuch as, law is by now well settled that in such a matter, judicial intervention at the hands of the High Court in exercise of its power of judicial review should be minimum. Page No.# 3/3

However, at the same time, the petitioner can make an application before the Recovery Officer for requesting a mode of payment including a compromise settlement subject to acceptance of the Bank.

At this stage Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be allowed to withdraw this application and to approach the Recovery Officer, who is in the session of the matter, by filing appropriate application.

Prayer stands allowed.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands closed on withdrawal. JUDGE Comparing Assistant