The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:- “i) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to grant the benefit of one time settlement to the petitioner after taking a lenient consideration of his case.
ii) writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 & P9 representations forthwith and at any rate within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
iii) Issue such other writ, appropriate order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper considering the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. It is brought to the notice of this Court that, when coercive steps were taken by the respondent Bank invoking the remedy under the SARFAESI Act for realising the amount due under the loan transaction, the petitioner had approached this W.P.(C) No.23185 of 2014 2 Court earlier, by filing W.P.(C) No.14898/2014. The said writ petition was disposed of as per Ext.P6 judgment, permitting the petitioner to clear the entire liability by way of 16 installments, beginning from 16.07.2014 onwards. In response to the prayer of the petitioner to arrange for private sale, it was made clear in the said judgment, that any application made by the petitioner for permission to sell the property shall not entitle the petitioner to default the installments. Ext.P7 is the application dated 24.06.2014 seeking for permission to effect private sale. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has effected a lump sum payment of Rs.5 lakhs on 13.08.14 and thereafter submitted Ext.P9 representation for granting the benefit of One Time Settlement Scheme, which is still to be acted upon. It is in the said circumstances, that the petitioner has approached this Court seeking for the above prayers.
3. The learned Standing Counsel for the Bank submits, on instructions that, there was a default on the part of the petitioner to satisfy the timely installments as per Ext.P6. The learned Standing Counsel also points out that, there is no Scheme for One Time Settlement Scheme, as on date; however, W.P.(C) No.23185 of 2014 3 adding that the amount as per Ext.P8 could be given credit to, against the installments to be satisfied in terms of Ext.P6 judgment.
4. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is set at liberty to satisfy the condition imposed by this Court, vide Ext.P6, so as to liquidate the liability. It is also open for the petitioner to bring the prospective purchaser, if any, to the doors of the Bank, so as to proceed with the steps for private sale, if so intended to be given effect to.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON,
JUDGE
sj