IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2091 of 2006 Udai Kumar Sinha, son of late Devi Prasad Mandal, resident of village Nandgola, P.S. Awtichak (Kahalgaon), District Bhagalpur. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. District Certificate Officer, Bhagalpur 3. Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Certificate Officer, Kahalgaon, Bhagalpur 4. Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Ghogha Branch, Bhagalpur. ---------------------------------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : A.C. to A.A.G. I --------------------------------- 02/ 15.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging order dated 03.06.2005, by which the Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Certificate Officer, Kahalgaon, Bhagalpur directed for issuance of Distress Warrant and Body Warrant against the petitioner in Certificate Case No. 220 of 1995-96 and also for restraining the concerned respondents from taking any coercive action against him till the disposal of Title Suit No. 92 of 2002, which is pending in Civil Court, Bhagalpur. 3. It transpires that against earlier order passed in Certificate Case No. 220 of 1995-96, the petitioner filed C.W.J.C. No. 3377 of 1997, which was dismissed by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.04.1997 (Annexure 2) with liberty to the petitioner to move the Certificate Officer and make a prayer for grant of instalments for payment of the dues, for which he might be found liable. The Certificate Officer was directed to see to it that the instalments were so fixed that the amount was realized within a - 2 - reasonable time having regard to the interest that accrued on such amount, which was outstanding. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Certificate Officer on 09.05.1997, and if he so appeared, warrant of arrest issued was not to be executed. However, if the petitioner filed an application for grant of instalments for payment of the dues, the Certificate Officer was directed to consider the application and ascertain the amount payable by the petitioner and fix the instalments if he found justification for the same. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that there was a compromise between the Branch Manager of the Bank and the petitioner in the year 2001 and the petitioner deposited some amount, but the said amount was not adjusted. He also claimed that when the brother of the petitioner, namely, Suresh Kumar Sinha did not pay his share in the loan money to him, he filed Partition Suit No. 92 of 2002, which is pending before the Subordinate Judge, Bhagalpur. It is also stated that in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner also filed applications before the authorities of the Bank on 30.07.2004 and 04.11.2004, but inspite of that the impugned order dated 03.06.2005 has been passed by respondent no.3 in Certificate Case No. 220 of 1995-96. However, he admits that the petitioner has not yet been arrested in view of the said impugned order. 5. From the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it appears that after the said order of this Court there was, admittedly, a compromise between the parties, in pursuance of which letter dated 21.12.2001 was sent by the State Bank of India stating that now only - 3 - Rs.94,530.00 was to be deposited by him in monthly instalments till 30.03.2002, but no document has been produced by the petitioner to show that any instalment has been paid by him to respondent-Bank as per the said compromise. 6. In the said circumstances, this Court does not find any merit in this writ petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed. MPS/ (S.N.Hussain, J.)