IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.54257 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
M/S. FACERS VENTURES PVT. LTD., FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. FACERS IMPEX AND TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED REGISTERED OFFICE AT 51 A IMPERIAL COURT, 33/1C CUNNINGHAM ROAD BENGALURU – 560 052 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SURENDRA KUMAR JAIN S/O LATE G.C. JAIN AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS.
(By Mr. SWAMY M.M. ADV.) AND:
1. HDFC BANK LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR REGISTERED OFFICE AT HDFC BANK HOUSE SENAPATI BAPAT MARG LOWER PAREL (WEST) MUMBAI – 400 013.
2. HDFC BANK LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER GOLDEN TOWER, AIRPORT ROAD KODIHALLI, BENGALURU – 560 017.
3. THE RETAIL LOAN HEAD/LAP REGIONAL HEAD – KARNATAKA … PETITIONER HDFC RETAIL ASSET DIVISION 1ST FLOOR, 548/D, MARUTHI MANSION CMH ROAD, INDIRANAGAR BENGALURU – 560 038.
(By Mr. FRANCIS XAVIER, ADV. FOR R1 TO R3) - - -
… RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT BANK TO ALLOW THE PETITIONER TO CLEAR THE OUTSTANDING AMOUNT UNDER ONE TIME SETTLEMENT SCHEME, BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 03.11.2017 VIDE ANNEXURE-F AND F1.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
ORDER Mr.Swamy M.M., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.Francis Xavier, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
With consent of the parties, the same is heard finally.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia seeks a writ of mandamus to the respondent to allow the petitioner to clear the outstanding amount under the one time settlement scheme by considering the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 03.11.2017.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the respondents on instructions submitted that the representation dated 03.11.2017 has already been rejected by the letter dated 18.12.2017.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent-Bank was insisting that the petitioner to pay the amount in installment upto the year 2024. However, the petitioner is ready and willing to settle the amount by way of payment in single installment and in this regard, he be permitted to submit a representation to the competent authority respondent-Bank and the competent authority is directed to decide the same in accordance with law. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in case such a representation is submitted, the same shall be dealt with in accordance with law.
6. In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case it is further directed that in case the petitioner submits a representation to the competent authority seeking to clear the outstanding amount under One Time Settlement Scheme within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today, the competent authority shall decide the representation, which may be submitted by the petitioner by a speaking order within a period of two weeks therefrom.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS