Thakan Sah v. The State Bank Of India And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.13421 of 2013 dt.27-08-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13421 of 2013 =========================================================== Thakan Sah S/O Sukhal Sah Resident Of Village - Parsarma, P.S. - Supaul, District - Supaul .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State Bank Of India Through Its Chairman/Managing Director Head Office, Mumbai

2. The Chief Manager (Rural)-Cum-Authorized Officer, Regional Commercial Office, State Bank Of India, Madhubani

3. The Authorized Officer, State Bank Of India, Supaul

4. The Branch Manager, State Bank Of India, A.D.B. , Supaul .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : None For the Respondent/s : Mr. KAUSHLENDRA KUMAR SINHA =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 27-08-2018 The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs- (i) For a direction upon the respondent authorities to furnish the details of accounts of the petitioner since March 2004 till today, so that he could be able to know as to what is the actual amount payable by the petitioner for which the respondents are under legal obligation to furnish.

(ii) For a further direction upon the respondents authorities to act upon their letter No. Br./Avd./31/1314 dated 09.06.2013 whereby although they have accepted to consider/rectify the faulty calculation of recovery and service charges under heading advertisement and agent charges, as well as to consider the request of petitioner to settle and compromise the matter under one time settlement scheme.

(iii) For further direction upon the respondent authorities not to take any coercive action against the petitioner during the pendency of this writ application. (iv) For any other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is found entitled in the facts and circumstances of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.13421 of 2013 dt.27-08-2018 case.

2. None appears on behalf of the petitioner despite repeated calls.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent-bank makes a statement at the Bar on instruction that the account of the petitioner has been closed and no further amount is outstanding against the petitioner.

4. Having regard to the statement of the respondent-bank as above, the writ petition stands disposed of. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/BT AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 30.08.2018 Transmission Date NA