Mohammed Nazib Ul Haque v. State Of Odisha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.13643 of 2022 Mohammed Nazib Ul Haque ....

Petitioner Mr. B.K. Routray, Advocate -versusState of Odisha & Ors.

....

Opposite Parties Mr. G.D.Kar,Adv. for Opp.Party-Bank

CORAM:

JUSTICE S. K. SAHOO AND JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY

ORDER

02.06.2022 2.

1.

This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.

Order No 2.

Heard Mr. B.K.Routray, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. G.D. Kar, learned counsel for the opposite party-Bank.

3.

The petitioner Mohammed Nazib Ul Haque has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to the opposite party-Bank to waive the claim of the bank against the Petitioner and to issue CIBIL clearance.

4.

Mr. G.D.Kar, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party-Bank on instruction submitted that the outstanding loan dues against the

// 2 // petitioner as on date is Rs.4,38,362/- (rupees four lakhs thirty eight thousand three hundred six two).

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit 25% of the outstanding dues and make an application for One Time Settlement/settlement of the loan dues and direction may be given to the opposite party-Bank to consider the same giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, without entering into the merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that if the petitioner deposits 25% of the outstanding dues and files an application for One Time Settlement/settlement of the loan dues within a period of two weeks from today before the opposite party no.2, the same shall be considered in accordance with law by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a further period of two weeks and the decision taken thereon shall be communicated to the petitioner. It is made clear that in the event the petitioner fails to deposit the amount as directed within the time stipulated, the opposite party-Bank is at liberty to take steps against the petitioner in accordance

// 3 // with law. Till consideration of such application for One Time Settlement/settlement of the loan dues, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner.

S.K. Sahoo (Vacation Judge) Biraja Prasanna Satapathy (Vacation Judge) Subrat/ Sangita