SHAFIQUE AHMAD Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for the following reliefs :-

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners stated that petitioner No. 1 is the proprietor of the business firm namely M/s. New Royal Shoe dealing in retail trade of foot wears, whereas petitioner No. 2 is the guarantor of the cash credit loan account of petitioner No. 1 which was granted by the respondent-Bank in the year 2004 and which was availed by petitioner No. 1 to the tune of Rs. 7,00,000/- against securities, including equitable mortgage of residential house of petitioner No. 2.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners also submitted that the proposal sent by petitioner No. 1 was neither processed by the authorities as required under the Scheme nor any communication regarding acceptance or rejection of petitioner's proposal was sent by the authorities of the Bank, although steps to be taken by the sanctioning authority in that regard had been specifically provided in paragraphs of the OTS Scheme, 2010 which was offered by the Bank to petitioner No. 1. The said steps are as follows :-