JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the communication of the 3rd respondent dated 25.4.2017, quash the same and consequentially forbear the 2nd and 3rd respondent from insisting payment of foreclosure penalty.)

The writ on hand has been instituted, questioning the validity of the communication of the third respondent dated 25.04.2017.

2. The writ petitioner states that he is the sole Proprietor of M/s.Murugan Idli Shop. The writ petitioner is a businessman and running a business in the name and style of “Murugan Idli Shop”, which is sole proprietary concern. The petitioner is assessed to tax. The third respondent/Bank had sanctioned two term loan accounts with a limit of Rs.10 Crore by taking over the outstanding loan of the petitioner with Fullerton India Credit Company Limited. The term loan agreement dated 06.03.2014 was signed by the petitioner in his capacity as the sole proprietor of “Murugan Idli Shop”. In April 2017, there was an outstanding of Rs.8,25,55,000/-. The petitioner approached the third respondent / IDBI Bank with the proposal to shift hi