AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
The petitioner is a defaulting borrower and the prayer in the present petitioner is limited to extension of time to deposit the amounts of installments in terms of the OTS Scheme sanctioned vide Memo dated 19.04.2021 (available at page 16 of the Paper Book). The same reads as under:
"ASSET RECOVERY BRANCH, RO, CUTTACK
STATIONED AT-BMC BHABANI ENCLAVE, BLOCK
4 WING-3 SAHIDNAGAR-751007, BHUBANESWAR 0674-2541927
Ref:ARB:SDM;2021/36 Dt.19.04.2021
Without Prejudice
Sub: M/s. Danda Padma: Sanction of Compromise Proposal
This letter bear reference to your letter dt.17.04.2021 on the captioned subject. As per your discussion with our FGM, we have sanctioned compromise settlement of Rs.65 lakhs to be paid in three months. You were also intimated to deposit 20% of OTS amount as upfront amount.
In this regard you have already submitted Demand Draft of Rs.9.98 lakhs and Cash of Rs.3.02 lakhs on 9th April as upfront money of 20% of OTS amount. Hence, we request you to deposit rest of OTS amount Rs.52 lakhs in three monthly instalments as per schedule given below:
Rs15 lakhs to be deposited by 15.05.2021
Rs15 lakhs to be deposited by 15.06.2021
Rs22 lakhs to be deposited by 15.07.2021
We would however like to inform you that if you fail to comply with the above terms and condition for payment of OTS amount, your OTS stands cancelled and bank will continue all legal action for recovery of bank's dues. Hence, our legal action shall continue till the final payment of the OTS amount."
Learned counsel for the petitioner heard.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner had not deposited any installment by the dates specified in the sanctioned letter except a portion to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-, out of one of the installments of Rs.15,00,000/-. The ground projected for seeking extension before this Court was the hardships and circumstances existing due to the pandemic situation.
In view of the willingness and readiness of the petitioner to deposit substantial amount of O.T.S., this Court on 08.11.2021 passed the following order:
"1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for some time to place some additional documents on record.
List this matter on 30th November, 2021 high up on the list.
The interim order dated 09.8.2021 is subject to the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.30 Lakhs within one week from today, failing which, the interim order shall automatically cease to operate. The amount so deposited, shall be kept in no lien account."
At the time of resumed hearing, it is conceded by the learned counsel for the petitioner that his client has not deposited the amount in terms of the interim order passed by this Court. That apart, learned counsel for the Bank points out that the property has been successfully put to auction on 10.08.2021 and the successful bidder has already deposited the required amount.
In view of the above, we find no ground to invoke our equitable/discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of this Court.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
..............................