Order

02/07/2025

1. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency of this writ petition, the Baroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank came to be merged into the Rajasthan Gramin Bank and certain documents, in this regard, have been placed on the record.

2. Aggrieved by the order dated 04.06.2018 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Alwar (for short, “the PLA”), the instant writ petition has been preferred before this Court.

3. By passing the impugned award dated 04.06.2018, the PLA has allowed the complaint submitted by the respondents and has issued directions to the petitioner to issue Kisan Credit Card in favour of the respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after receipt of the notice of the complaint, a detailed reply to the complaint was filed on 16.04.2018 and thereafter, some time was sought for producing certain documents, on record, to show that the respondent is a wilful defaulter of other banks as well, hence, he was not entitled to get Kisan Credit Card to get loan from the petitioner-bank. Counsel submits that time was not granted and the complaint filed by the respondent was allowed vide impugned judgment dated 04.06.2018. Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the instant writ petition.

5. Counsel submits that various documents have been placed by the petitioner on record of this case along-with an application under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC, which clearly indicate that the respondent is a wilful defaulter and has not repaid the borrowed amount to the secured creditor in the past, hence, under these circumstances, the respondent is not entitled to get the Kisan Credit Card. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted.

6. None has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent.

7. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record.

8. Perusal of the record as well as the impugned award dated 04.06.2018 passed by the PLA indicate that after receipt of the notice of complaint, reply to the same was submitted wherein the averments made in the complaint were denied by the petitioner. It appears that some time was sought by the petitioner for producing documents in support of its contention, but no time was granted and the complaint submitted by the respondent has been allowed. Various documents have been placed on record in support of contentions made by the petitioner stating that the respondent is a wilful defaulter of other secured creditors and he has failed to return the borrowed amount in the past. This Court is not going into the documents annexed with the application filed by the petitioner under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC.

9. In the considered opinion of this Court, these are disputed question of facts and the same cannot be adjudicated by this Court under its writ jurisdiction, contained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India .

10. In the considered opinion of this Court, these documents are required to be considered by the PLA afresh, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the respondent. Keeping in view the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, the impugned award dated 04.06.2018 passed by the PLA stands quashed and set-aside.

11. The matter is remitted to the PLA to decide the same afresh, after taking into consideration the documents/ evidence submitted by both the sides.

12. Needless to observe, the complaint would be decided expeditiously as early as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt o