IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WRIT PETITION NO. 137 OF 2011 (MS) Aman Kapoor ………….Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. ……….Respondents. Present: Mr. B.D. Pande, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Dinesh Gahtori, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand. Ms. Joyce Irwin, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for respondent no. 3. 20th January, 2011 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard Mr. B.D. Pande, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Dinesh Gahtori, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos. 1 and 2, and Ms. Joyce Irwin, Advocate holding brief of Mr. D.S. Patni, Advocate for respondent no. 3. 2. Admittedly, the petitioner had taken a loan from the State Bank of India, Branch Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. Since the loan was not repaid by the petitioner, recovery proceedings were initated against him. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the same. However, during the course of argument, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is prepared to pay the loan amount, if easy instalments be fixed. Ms. Joyce Irwin, Advocate, who is appearing for the State Bank of India states that if the petitioner is willing to pay the entire loan within a 2 stipulated period of six months, the Bank has no objection. 3. On the basis of the aforesaid statement made by the both the counsels, present writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The petitioner shall pay an amount of ` 38,870/-on or before 1st March, 2011. The remaining amount shall be given in five easy instalments, which will spread over for a further period of five months commencing from 1st March, 2011. In other words, apart from the payment of ` 38,870/-, which shall be paid on 1st March, 2011 and the next instalments will be paid on 1st April and 1st May, 2011 and so on, and the last instalment shall also include the entire interest. For details of the calculation, the petitioner must be present before the Branch Manager /respondent no. 3. It is made clear that in case of even one single default, the bank authorities shall be at liberty to initiate recovery proceedings against the petitioner. 4. With the aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) Vacation Judge 20.1.2011 Rathour