IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.370 of 2009 Dinkar Bhardwaj, S/O-Sri Jawahar Lal Bhardwaj, resident of Mohalla-Ashok Nagar, Pokharia Ward No. 14, P.S.+District-Begusarai ……Petitioner Versus 1. The Allahabad Bank through its Chairman, Head Office, Calcutta. 2. The Zonal Manager, Regional Office, Muzaffarpur. 3. The Branch Manager, Allahabad Bank, Motihani Branch, Begusarai. …….Respondents. with CWJC No.649 of 2009 Dinkar Bhardwaj S/O-Sri. Jawahar Lal Bhardwaj, resident of Mohalla-Ashok Nagar, Pokharia Ward No. 14, P.S.+District-Begusarai. …….Petitioner Versus 1. The Allahabad Bank through its Chairman, Head Office, Calcutta. 2. The Zonal Manager, Regional Office, Muzaffarpur. 3. The Branch Manager, Allahabad Bank, Motihani Branch, Begusarai ……..Respondents. ----------- 03. 24.03.2009 Petitioner in both the cases being the same has taken two financial accommodations from the Allahabad Bank, Begusarai. One was a loan for making agricultural godown and the other of cash credit facility. Petitioner allegedly defaulted in both and the accounts became Non Performing Assets. Bank supposedly issued notices in terms of Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI ACT which was responded to by the petitioner though belatedly. He sent his representation to the Bank under speed post but still Bank refuses to acknowledge receipt of the same. 2 Petitioner states that almost year prior to institution of the present proceedings under SARFAESI ACT, petitioner had already instituted a title suit for rendition of proper accounts in which summons have been duly issued to the Bank which again is disputed by the Bank as not having received it. Thus in sum and substance petitioner admits being in default but disputes the liability as quantified by the Bank. In such a situation, the Petitioner submits that he is ready to pay the amounts due and payable, provided accounts are dully settled giving credit to the amounts deposited and received in favour of the petitioner, charging correct interest rate. In view of the eagerness of petitioner to pay the amount, I direct the Bank not to proceed further in the matter. Bank should revise its account and seeks petitioner’s objections thereto. If on such rewriting of account, some relief is available to the petitioner, the same has to be granted to the petitioner. If any money is received on behalf of the petitioner then the same has to be credited on the day as and when received to the account of the petitioner. Further the Bank would grant maximum relief that is permissible and possible. Thus it would work out an amount on which settlement could be arrived at and disclose the same to the 3 petitioner within one month from today. Petitioner would within two weeks from that day file his detailed objections on the accounting and the accounting procedure with the Bank. Once the amounts are so communicated to the petitioner, petitioner would get six months time to repay the entire dues on both accounts subject to the interest accruing on the settlement amount at the contractual rate but instead of being on quarterly rests it would be simple interest. In case the petitioner fails to make payment and liquidating the dues within a period of six months from the date he received the details accounts as aforesaid, Bank would be free to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law as if no order has been passed by this Court. With these observations and directions, the writ application stands disposed of. Shageer (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J)