D.K.SINHA, J. - (1.) THE appellant M/s Om Flour Mills (P) Ltd. a company under the Companies Act 1956 preferred this appeal for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 4.3.2002(Annexure -7) passed by Respondent No. 1 pursuant to the order passed in the cases of the appellant being C.W.J.C. NO. 71 of 1991(R) and also W.P.(C) NO. 1512 of 2002. The prayer of the appellant for issuance of writ of certiorari for quashing of the order of Respondent No. 1 dated 4.3.2002 was rejected by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 2009 of 2002 on 22.3.2002.
(2.) THE appellant had earlier preferred a W.P.(C) No. 1512 of 2002 for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 4.3.2002 and while the said writ petition was about to be dismissed, the learned Single Judge after noticing the decision of the Supreme Court of India in Haryana Financial Corporation and Anr. v. Jagdamba Oil Mills and Anr. reported in 2002 (1) Supreme Court 404, the appellant herein undertook that he was willing to pay any amount that may be found payable subject to clarification as to whether the interest that had been charged was outside the amount of interest as per order of the Hon'ble Division Bench. The learned Single Judge in the said writ petition having been found that there was no dishonest intention on the part of the appellant in making payment to the BSFC upon being satisfied that the appellant had already paid a sum of Rs. 1,06,49,290/ - as against the loan of 56 lakhs, liberty was given to the appellant to file a fresh representation before the Respondent No. 1 herein within time framed and accordingly, reasoned order was required to be passed thereon within five days and the appellant in its turn and as per statement made in the court was directed to pay the amount so determined within time as might be fixed by the Respondent No. 1. Mr. Majumdar, on behalf of the appellant pointed out that the learned Single Judge, while disposing the writ petition W.P.(C) No. 2009 of 2002, did not decide a single issue raised therein and the same has been dismissed merely on decision of Supreme Court in Haryana Financial Corporation and Anr. v. Jagdamba Oil Mills (Supra) case which has got no relevance with the facts and circumstances of the present appeal.
(3.) WHILE dealing with W.P.(C) No. 2009 of 2002 the learned Single Judge observed that pursuant to the opportunity accorded to the appellant herein in W.P.(C) No. 1512 of 2002 it was evident from the order passed by the respondent NO. 1 on 4.3.2002 that the appellant had raised additional issues in his representation before the Managing Director, B.S.F.C. regarding adjustment of capital subsidy amounting to Rs. 12,42,600/ - from the date of sanction i.e. from 18.2.1989, penal interest to be waived owing to non -adjustment and rebate to the tune of Rs. 3,78567/ - as per assurance of BSFC against his undertaking before the learned Single Bench. In view of such additional issues raised by the appellant and considering the observation made by the Supreme Court of India in Haryana Financial Corporation and Anr. v. Jagdamba Oil Mills and Anr. (Supra) as here under. If it is one thing to assist the borrower who has intention to repay, but is prevented by unsurmountable difficulties in meeting the commitments indulgence shown to chronic defaulter would amount to flogging a dead horse without any conceivable result being expected The learned Single Judge rejected the writ petition of the petitioner -appellant. ;