Allahabad High Court
VAKIL AHMADversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The petition is dismissed for being bereft of necessary details and supporting documents.
Summary
The petitioners, Vakil Ahmad, filed a writ petition seeking quash of a recovery notice issued by D.C.B. Bank, Meerut, which directed them to deposit an amount by 31.07.2026. The petition alleged that the notice was wrongly received by the respondent's counsel and that it stemmed from a request for foreclosure of property, but no copy of the underlying letter or supporting documents were attached. The respondents contended that the notice was improperly served. The High Court examined the petition and found it lacked essential details and documentary evidence required to substantiate the claim. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, granting the petitioners liberty to file a fresh petition with proper averments and documents. The dismissal was based on procedural insufficiency rather than on the merits of the underlying dispute.
Issues considered
- What is the adequacy of the petitioner's pleadings and supporting documents to challenge the recovery notice?
- Whether the court can quash the recovery notice in the absence of requisite evidence?
Subjects
- writ petition
- recovery notice
- foreclosure
- procedural deficiency
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 39609 of 2026
Vakil Ahmad
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Javed Alam, Mohd. Azam
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Satyam Singh
Court No. - 5
HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.
HON'BLE VIVEK SARAN, J.
1. It is informed by learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Satyam Singh, learned
counsel for the respodnent that his office has wrongly received the notice on behalf of
D.C.B. Bank, Branch Meerut.
2. The instant petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the recovery notice by
which a direction was given to the petitioner to deposit the amount till 31.07.2026. It
is clear from the aforesaid notice that the same has been issued on the request made by
the petitioner for foreclosure of the property. Neither the copy of the letter is appended
in the present petition nor the same has been place before the Court today.
3. In such view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the present petition is bereft of
necessary details and is, accordingly, dismissed. However liberty rest with the
petitioner to file a fresh petition with better averments and documents.
(Vivek Saran,J.) (Prakash Padia,J.)
September 30, 2026
Deepika
Digitally signed by :-
DEEPIKA SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…