Rampal v. Shiv Lal, Shyam Narayan

Heard Shri Shiv Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank.

The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned recovery notice dated 15.09.2023 issued by respondent no. 2, whereby a sum of Rs. 7,34,905/- along with interest has been sought to be recovered from the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had availed an agricultural loan of Rs. 2,75,000/- in two instalments in the year 2012 for agricultural and farming purposes. It is further submitted that the petitioner has already deposited an amount of Rs. 1,25,000/-, however, due to financial constraints, he could not regularly repay the remaining amount. It is contended that the recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner are illegal and arbitrary. Learned counsel further submits that no demand was ever raised by the respondent-Bank from the year 2012 till issuance of the impugned recovery notice, thereby allowing the loan liability to swell to Rs. 7,34,905/- along with accrued interest. He next submits that the loan was sanctioned at the rate of interest of 14.25%, which is contrary to the policy of the State Government and cannot be said to be reasonable, even from the perspective of the RBI guidelines.

The matter requires consideration.

List and connect this petition with Writ-C No. 10013 of 2026 titled Baijnath vs. State of U.P. and Others. 2 WRIC No. 17737 of 2026

Considering the aforesaid submissions, the operation and effect of the impugned recovery notice dated 15.09.2023 issued by respondent no. 2 shall remain stayed during the pendency of the present writ petition. May 13, 2026 Shafique (Vinod Diwakar,J.)