Back
DIPANKAR DATTA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Assistant General Manager State Bank of India – Appellant
Versus
Tanya Energy Enterprises Through Its Managing Partner Shri Alluri Lakshmi Narasimha Varma – Respondent
Understood. Please provide the legal document content (inside
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of the appeal against prior judgments. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. appellants argue against the eligibility of ots 2020 scheme. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. respondent claims improper denial of ots consideration. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. court's notice issuing order highlights crucial dispute. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. court reviews substantive arguments against rejection. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. scheme conditions for ots and application issues discussed. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 7. discussion on grounds for application rejection. (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 8. court considers past compliance and entitlement. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 9. judicial balancing of procedural and substantive justice. (Para 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 10. determination on valid grounds for denying ots. (Para 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 11. final conclusion favoring appeal and paving way for reconsideration. (Para 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 12. civil appeal is allowed; procedural next steps outlined. (Para 45 , 46 , 47) |
JUDGMENT :
DIPANKAR DATTA, J.
THE APPEAL
1. In this appeal, by special leave, a challenge has been mounted to the judgment and order dated 21st December, 2022 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court o
A creditor's obligation to consider an OTS application is contingent on the borrower's compliance with eligibility criteria, including upfront payment requirements.
(1) No borrower can, as a matter of right, pray for grant of benefit of One Time Settlement Scheme.(2) No bank can be compelled to accept a lesser amount under OTS Scheme despite the fact that Bank i....
No borrower has a vested right to compel a bank to accept a One Time Settlement, as banks retain discretion in recovery matters.
Borrowers must comply with One Time Settlement terms to claim benefits; courts cannot interfere with banks' discretion in such matters.
Courts cannot compel banks to provide benefits of One Time Settlement Schemes if borrowers fail to meet payment obligations under the scheme, preserving the contractual sanctity and banks' discretion....
Banks are not mandated to disclose benchmarks or consider OTS proposals, and courts cannot compel alteration of existing financial agreements under Article 226.
Point of law: Loans by financial institutions are granted from public money generated at the taxpayer’s expense. Such loan does not become the property of the person taking the loan, but retains its ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
