Mr Hari Babu (Borrower) & Anr. v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The petitioners shall clear the entire arrears due, within a period of three months i.e. not later than 31 January 2026. (ii) In discharge of dues, the petitioners shall deposit, by way…
Judgment
#1. Heard Sri Durvesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ramesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent - Bank.
#2. Petitioner has committed default in repayment of secured debt to the respondent-Bank. Bank has initiated proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. However, no auction has taken place.
#3. At the outset, petitioners have offered to pay the outstanding amount Rs. 10,75,541/- together with entire interest due, within a period of three months. This offer has been accepted by learned counsel for the respondent - Bank.
#4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The petitioners shall clear the entire arrears due, within a period of three months i.e. not later than 31 January 2026. (ii) In discharge of dues, the petitioners shall deposit, by way of first installment, a sum of Rs. 2,75,541/- with the respondent - Bank, on or before 31 October 2025. (iii) Upon deposit of Rs. 2,75,541/- by the petitioners, the respondent - Bank shall immediately communicate to the petitioner the exact amount being 2 WRIC No. 33393 of 2025 claimed from him including interest computation upto December, 2025 (on reducing balance). (iv) Petitioners shall thereafter deposit Rs. 4,00,000/- on or before 31 December 2025. (v) The remaining amount together with interest claimed by the respondent - Bank may be paid, by way of last installment, on or before 31 January 2026.
#5. Subject to the continued compliance of the order being made by the petitioners, the auction proceedings may be kept in abeyance so however that the attachment shall continue but the secured asset may not be auctioned and physical possession may not be altered.
#6. Any other amount that may have been deposited by the petitioners pursuant to the impugned demand notice, may be adjusted against the last deposit to be made under this order.
#7. Subject to full compliance being made by the petitioners to the terms of this order, no further amount can be recovered from the petitioner either by way of legal expense and other charges as the entire amount has been paid under the directions issued under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
#8. The petitioners may be permitted to take out their movable valuables property etc. with the prior permission (in writing) of respondent no.4 on
13.10.2025 at 11:00 a.m. The petitioners undertake to leave the said premises at 2:00 p.m. October 7, 2025 Abhilash (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) ABHILASH SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 31 Jan 2026. The bench was SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, INDRAJEET SHUKLA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.