Rajanikanta Sahani v. Ao, Union Bank Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C ) No.1267 of 2022 Rajanikanta Sahani ....

Petitioner Mr. Sanat Kumar Das, Advocate -versusAuthorised Officer, Union Bank of India, Bhubaneswar & Others ....

Opposite Parties Mr. M. Acharya, Advocate (for bank)

CORAM:

JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH JUSTICE M. S. SAHOO ORDER (Oral) 10.02.2022

2. 1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode. Order No

2. The Petitioner, who is a defaulting borrower in a housing loan for a sum of Rs.20,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty Lakhs) raised from Union Bank of India, Mangalabagh Branch, Cuttack has laid challenge to the auction sale notice dated 15/17th December, 2021, whereby the auction of the mortgaged property is fixed for 20th January, 2022 for recovering an outstanding liability around Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty lakhs) as on 31st March, 2021.

3. At the time of hearing, Mr. M. Acharya, learned counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties/bank submits that the present Writ Petition has become infructuous as the auction fixed for 20th January, 2022 had failed for want of any bidder.

// 2 //

4. As regards the prayer for consideration of the Petitioner for OTS, there is no prevailing OTS policy under which the same can be considered.

5. In response, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that his client is ready and willing to upgrade his account to a standard account by depositing the amounts overdue in the NPA account which would be around Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees four lakhs) as on today.

6. Keeping in view the above, we dispose of the Writ Petition as infructuous. However, the Petitioner is free to approach the bank and deposit the amounts of defaulted instalments for upgrading his accounts.

(Jaswant Singh) Judge ( M. S. Sahoo) Judge February 10th, 2022 Cuttack.

sangita