C.R. No.4640 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.4640 of 2009 Date of Decision : 18.08.2009 Ishan Singh .....Petitioner versus State Bank of Patiala .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.R.S.Rana, Advocate, for the petitoner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- ORDER Surya Kant, J. (Oral) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 28.7.2009 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Assandh, whereby the warrant for the sale of the property of the petitioner mortgagee with the respondent-bank have been issued and court auction has been fixed for 17.9.2009. There is a long history to demonstrate as to how the petitioner has successfully abused the process of law and evaded his loan liability. The petitioner had taken a loan of Rs.94,000/- on 6.11.1989 from the respondent-bank, out of which only a sum of Rs.9872/- was paid C.R. No.4640 of 2009 2 by him on 17.12.1992. The respondent-bank filed a suit for recovery which was decreed about more than 10 years back i.e., on 10.9.1997 for recovery of Rs.1,99,863.50 alongwith future interest @ 15.5 % per annum with half yearly rests from the date of filing of the suit. The petitioner, however, did not honour the Court decree also except that he deposited a sum of Rs.50,000/- on 27.10.2008 after the Executing Court took some coercive steps. The petitioner, notwithstanding the attachment order passed by the Executing Court, harvested the crops which led to registration of an FIR against him and his son and it is only when he filed criminal Misc.No.11324 of 2009 for anticipatory bail, that this Court granted him anticipatory bail vide order dated 25.4.2009 with a direction to deposit the decretal amount alongwith interest @ 9% per annum. Petitioner, thereafter, deposited Rs.3,59,721/- on 5.5.2009, followed by another deposit of Rs.32,200/- on 3.8.2009. In this manner, the petitioner is claimed to have deposited a total sum of Rs.5,01,865/- as against the demand of the Bank for over Rs.14,00,000/-. It is in this background that the Executing Court has now initiated steps to auction the agricultural land of the petitioner which is mortgaged with the respondent-bank, so as to recover the balance of the decretal amount. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and seen the conduct of the petitioner, as is apparent from the facts noted above, no case of interference by this Court is made out. The warrant of auction issued by the Executing Court is in the right direction as the petitioner can not C.R. No.4640 of 2009 3 hoodwink the process of law or frustrate Court decree. However, in order to enable the petitioner to approach the respondent bank for settlement in terms of One Time Settlement Policy, if any, this revision petition is disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner deposits another sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with the Executing Court within two weeks, the sale by way of auction shall not be confirmed for two months during which the respondent-bank shall consider the case of the petitioner under the One Time Settlement Policy, if any. Dasti. 18-08-2009 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE