Nand Lal Mahto v. The Uco Bank Through Its Senior Manager And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8966 of 2014 =========================================================== Nand Lal Mahto Son of Late Ram Adin Mahto Resident of Mohalla - Ranipur, Police Station - Khajekala, District - Patna .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The UCO Bank through Its Senior Manager, UCO Bank Patliputra Industrial Area, Alpana Market, Patliputra, Patna

2. The Manager, UCO Bank, Patliputra Industrial Area, Alpana Market, Patliputra, Patna

3. The Authorised Officer, UCO Bank, Patliputra Industrial Area, Alpana Market, Patliputra, Patna

4. The Area Zonal Manager, UCO Bank, Circle Office, Patna .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prafull Chandra Jha,Advocate For the Resp. Bank : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 08-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Respondent Bank.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for a direction to the Respondent Bank to supply the details of calculation in respect of the amount of Rs. 3,67,692/- being sought to be recovered from the petitioner by issuance of legal notice.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite requests, the calculation chart relating to the amount said to be owing from the petitioner in respect of the loan of Rs. 6,00,000/- granted in the year 2004 has not been made available. The petitioner has now been served with a legal notice for recovery of the amount of Rs. 3,67,692/- without however

Patna High Court CWJC No.8966 of 2014 dt.08-02-2016 furnishing the detailed calculation thereof. It is submitted that the petitioner has been depositing the instalments and the amount computed by the Bank as outstanding is clearly erroneous.

4. Learned counsel for the Respondent Bank appears and has been heard.

5. In view of the nature of grievance of the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Bank with a representation for appropriate redressal. If any such representation before the Senior Manager of the Respondent Bank is filed within a period of two weeks from today, he shall ensure that the details of the calculation of the amount said to be outstanding against the petitioner are supplied, if not already so done, within a further period of four weeks thereafter. The amount finally outstanding shall be computed after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, before taking further steps for recovery.

6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid observation.

(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran U