This writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to the 2nd respondent to reconsider One Time Settlement (OTS) application submitted by the 3rd respondent in the light of Ext.P8 letter. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the guarantor and the 3rd respondent is the borrower. The 3rd respondent and the petitioner has approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.5036/2008. The above writ petition was filed for the similar relief in this writ petition. That was dismissed. Hence I do not find any reason to approach this Court when petitioner’s claim has been rejected as per Ext.P3.
3. Further it is stated by the learned Standing counsel for the respondent bank that revenue recovery proceedings are pending against petitioner and 3rd W.P.(C).No.11035 of 2009
2
respondent. Accordingly the Petitioner is not entitled for any relief in this writ petition.
Accordingly this writ petition is dismissed.
jm/ Sd/ A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE