- Court
- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- Decided
- 29 October 2023
- Case no.
- WRIC 35001/2023
Judgment
Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 35001 of 2023 Petitioner :- Atul Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Jalaj Kumar Kushwaha,Ray Sahab Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Sanjai Singh Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J. Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Sanjai Singh, learned counsel for the respondents and learned Standing Counsel. It is evident from the record that the loan in question was taken by the mother of the petitioner no.1 and 2 and the respondent nos.3 and 4. When a notice was sent to the respondent nos.3 and 4 with regard to the loan in question, the petitioners have approached this Court praying that only such property be taken over by the bank, which belonged to the respondent nos.3 and 4. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that after the death of the mother, the petitioners also had share in the property. Be that as it may, we find that the property was mortgaged and no interference can be made by this Court. The petitioners, if are aggrieved by by the recovery, they may take recourse to such action as may be available to them under the laws. With these observations, this petition stands dismissed. Order Date :- 30.10.2023 Raj High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Source: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.