- (1.) Heard Sri Y, S. Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vipin Sinha for the respondent No. 3.
(2.) Proceedings Initiated by the respondent No. 3-bank for recovery of loan amount was challenged by the petitioner by filing a writ petition No. 30063 of 2004. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 2-8-2004 with the following directions; (i) Petitioner will deposit the entire amount so payable upto 31st July, 2004 within a period of one month from today in the respondent bank. (ii) After aforesaid deposit petitioner further undertakes to pay regular instalments as and when they become due in accordance with the bank schedule. (iii) In the event deposits are made in the manner as indicated above, respondents will not proceed to recover any amount from the petitioner by taking any coercive process. (iv) In the event the amount is deposited as indicated above, respondent bank will not take any recovery charge. (v) Tractor of the petitioner, if under attachment shall be released on deposit of the defaulted amount if any, payable up to 31st July, 2004.
(3.) It has been stated in paragraph Nos. 4 and 5 of the writ petition that in pursuance of the aforesaid order the petitioner went to deposit the amount with. Tehsil authorities but the same was not accepted and the tractor was auctioned on 18-12- 2004. Thereafter, an application was moved in the earlier writ petition seeking a direction not to confirm the sale of the tractor and to accept the instalments. The fate of the said application has not been disclosed in the writ petition but learned counsel for the petitioner has orally informed that no order has been passed on the same. Although, the date of moving the application has not been disclosed but it has been stated in the writ petition that the sale was confirmed during the pendency of the said application.;