The court cannot grant relief if the petitioner fails to demonstrate bona fides regarding compliance in loan recovery cases.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner by the 6^th respondent bank for recovery of amounts due under credit facilities availed by the petitioner from the

6^th respondent.

2. When this matter came up for admission on

11-11-2025, this Court passed the following interim order:

“Admit.

Government Pleader accepts notice for respondents 1 to 4. Issue notice to the 6^th respondent by speed post. Notice to 5^th respondent is dispensed with for the time being.

Further coercive steps against the petitioner shall remain suspended for a period of one month subject to condition the petitioner remits a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards the loan liability within a period of two weeks from today.

Post on 11.12.2025. “

Thereafter, when this matter came up for consideration on

11-12-2025, this Court passed the following order.

“Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner could remit only a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) and seeks further time to pay the balance amount of Rs.75,000/-, payable in terms of the interim order dated 11.11.2025. It is submitted that, the balance amount will be paid within a period of two weeks from today.

2. Registry reports that the petitioner has not paid process to take out notice to the

6^th respondent.

3. Petitioner shall take steps, by 05.00 pm tomorrow (12.12.2025), to serve notice on the 6^th respondent.

4. The time for payment of the balance amount of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy five thousand only) payable by the petitioner, in terms of the interim order dated 11.11.2025, is extended by a period of two weeks from today. If the petitioner pays the balance amount within the time specified above, the interim order will stand extended by a period of one month.”

Even today, when this matter is taken up for consideration, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the 6^th respondent that the petitioner has not complied with the condition of remitting the balance amount of Rs.75,000/- directed to be paid in terms of the order dated

11-12-2025.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has been unable to contact the petitioner.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the 6^th respondent, I am of the view that the petitioner has not demonstrated bona fides entitling him to any relief in exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as he has failed to comply with the condition imposed in the interim order, despite the extension of time. This Court exercises very limited jurisdiction in matters of recovery of loans by banks and financial institutions, and where bona fides have not been demonstrated, it is not possible for this Court to grant any further relief to the petitioner. Therefore, I have no option, but to dismiss this writ petition.

Accordingly, the writ petition will stand dismissed.

Sd/-