- (1.) Petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of mandamus, directing the respondent-bank to settle the case of the petitioner as per the OTS guidelines framed by Reserve Bank of India.
(2.) Brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that petitionerfirm has applied and was granted an Agricultural Term Loan for the purpose of modernization of the cold storage, of Rs. 25,00,000/- on 30.3.2000 for a term of seven years; the Agricultural Term Loan was secured by the equitable mortgage of property measuring 18 kanals, comprised in khata No.3/6, 7, khasra No.377 min South (28 kanals 18 marlas), 377 min North (41 kanals 0 marla), out of total land measuring 69 kanals 18 marlas, in the name of Sh. Ramandeep Singh and Sh. Charandeep Singh, situated at village Rehana Jattan, Tehsil Phagwara, District Kapurthala (Punjab); petitioner has repaid an amount of Rs. 6,00,000/- in different instalments and last instalment was paid on 7.4.2001; thereafter no instalment was paid to clear the outstanding amount; petitioner-firm was classified as 'Non-Performing Asset' on 14.7.2001 and thereafter Original Application No.158/2002 was moved by the respondent-bank for the recovery of its dues before the Debts Recovery Tribunal; meanwhile bank has also initiated proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, as a few cheques issued by the petitioner towards outstanding amount were dishonoured; petitioner applied for One Time Settlement, however, it was not accepted, therefore, petitioner has approached this Court.
(3.) Written statement to the writ petition was filed by the respondent-bank, inter alia, stating that petitioner had applied and was granted Agricultural Term Loan of Rs. 25,00,000/- for specific purpose i.e. for utilizing the same towards the modernization of existing cold storage by incorporating additional refrigerator equipments; as per the terms and conditions of the agreement, petitioner was duty bound to submit detailed project completion report after utilization of the Agricultural Term Loan amount released in favour of the petitioner; as per conditions No.5 and 6 of the agreement, petitioner-borrower undertook that loan amount would be used only for the purpose for which it was sanctioned and any part thereof would not be used for any purpose whatsoever; it was further stipulated in the agreement that if borrower itself breaches any of the terms and conditions stipulated by the bank while sanctioning the loan, bank shall have right to recover the loan amount in one go and shall have right to initiate other legal proceedings. It has further been contended by the bank that petitioner had diverted the loan amount and has mis-utilized it for the purpose of construction of marriage palace and has constructed the marriage palace on the spot. It has further been averred that since the petitioner is guilty of breach of the terms and conditions of the Agricultural Term Loan and has diverted the loan amount for construction of the marriage palace, therefore, petitionerborrower was not entitled for any One Time Settlement and writ petition deserves to be dismissed.;