V.K.JHANJI,J - (1.) COUNSEL for the parties state that instead of deciding the application for vacation of stay, the writ petition itself may be decided on merits. In view of this, the writ petition is taken on board for final disposal.
(2.) THE contention of the petitioner in the writ petition is that the petitioner-company applied for loan of Rs. 18,70,000/- and a sum of Rs. 17,40,000/- was sanctioned on 25.5.1985 which was to be repaid in 14 half yearly instalments. According to the petitioner, it availed of only a sum of Rs. 12,12,000/- and decided to surrender the balance amount of Rs. 5,28,000/-. It is alleged that in fact, it surrendered unavailed amount of Rs. 5,28,000/-. Further according to the petitioner, it remained under bona fide behalf that because of surrendering of unavailed amount, 14 half-yearly instalments payable would be reduced proportionately but the respondent-Corporation without proportionately reducing the instalments, called upon the petitioner to pay the instalments as provided under the agreement. It also threatened that in case of default, it would take over the industrial unit of the petitioner company. In the writ petition, the only prayer is that the respondent-Corporation may be directed to reschedule repayment of loan availed of by it. Upon notice of the writ petition, detailed written statement has been filed by the respondent-Corporation. The case of respondent-Corporation is that the petitioner Company was asked from time to time to clear the amount but no steps were taken by it to pay the instalments. It is stated that at the time of filing of the written statement, after adjusting the amount already re-paid, approximately a sum of Rs. 14,00,000/- was outstanding. Written statement was filed on 4.3.1991 and according to the counsel for the respondent-Corporation, the amount now payable comes to about Rs. 77,00,000/-.
(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and gone through the record.;