NANDINI GARMENTS Vs. CANARA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorari quashing the possession notice dtd. 27/9/2021 at Annexure-D.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel Sri.R.Channakeshava for petitioner and learned counsel Sri.H.S.Rukkoji Rao for respondent-bank. Perused the writ petition papers.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that petitioner was extended One Time Settlement [for short OTS] and in terms of OTS, petitioner has cleared the dues. He invites attention of this Court to Annexure-B, memo for withdrawal filed by respondent-bank before the Debts Recovery Tribunal in S.A.No.99/2020. Further, he submits that as the petitioner has complied the interim order by depositing Rs.13.00 Lakhs before the respondent-bank, petitioner is not due to the respondent-bank. Further, he invites attention of this Court to order sheet dtd. 15/3/2021 in S.A.No.99/2020 and submits that the Tribunal had provided time to report settlement to the respondent- bank. He also invites attention of this Court to order dtd. 24/3/2021 wherein both the counsel appearing in S.A submitted that account is settled and account is closed. Thus, he submits that issuance of present possession notice is without application of mind and contrary to the records. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that due to COVID-19 pandemic, petitioner could not comply or pay the amount offered under OTS.