Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
D.DASH, V.NARASINGH
Suburban Industries Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Industrial Promotion And Investment Corporation Of Odisha Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed challenging ots rejection. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner claims discrimination in ots applications. (Para 2) |
| 3. opposition denies discrimination; defends ots rejection. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. petitioner reiterates claims; cites earlier court directions. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. discussions on past judgments relevant to ots. (Para 7) |
| 6. court debates petitioner's right to claim ots. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 7. court established ots not a right; depend on eligibility. (Para 10) |
| 8. court dismisses writ; affirms power of ipicol. (Para 11 , 12) |
JUDGMENT :
V. Narasingh, J.
1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition questioning the decision/order dated 23.02.2013 issued by the Opposite party no.1- IPICOL rejecting the One Time settlement proposal of the petitioner. Writ petition has been filed with a prayer to issue a direction to the opposite parties 1 and 2 to implement the scheme published under Annexure-4 (OTS-2011) qua the petitioner company and to issue direction to the said opposite parties to accept the proposal for OTS given by the petitioner company. For convenience of reference the prayer of the writ petition is extracted hereunder:
“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that your Lords
Borrowers cannot claim one-time settlement as a matter of right; financial institutions retain discretion to grant or deny OTS based on public interest and eligibility criteria.
(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....
Point of Law : The terms of one-time settlement scheme cannot also be interfered with or varied to the advantage or disadvantage of any person by resorting to the powers under Article 226 of the Cons....
A valid One Time Settlement (OTS) proposal must be evaluated on its own merits, considering actual repayments rather than solely asset valuations.
The acceptance of late payments under a One Time Settlement can imply a waiver of strict compliance with payment timelines, and interest clauses remain enforceable.
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....
Borrowers must comply with One Time Settlement terms to claim benefits; courts cannot interfere with banks' discretion in such matters.
![Bhanu Moulds and Dies [P] Ltd. VS Principal Secretary/Chairman and Managing Director, State Industries Promotion Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited - 2021 Supreme(Mad) 3614](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Madras_1.png)
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the principles of novation, discharge of liability, and reasonable compensation for delay in payment under the Indian Contract A....
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
