A claimant cannot assert a One Time Settlement as a matter of right when a recovery certificate has already been issued.

ORAL ORDER

1. (a) W.P.No.32280/2018 is filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:

''i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 13.12.2017 in TUNGABHADRA/FILES/OTS passed by the passed by the Respondent No.1 Assistant General Manager, Asset Recovery Management Branch, Bengaluru Vide Annexure-J;

ii) DECLARE that the loan account of the Petitioner No. 1 stands fully and finally settled and closed by virtue of the payment made of the entire One Time Settlement Amount vide letter dated 18.10.2017 (Annexure G1) issued by the Petitioner and vide letter dated 24.10.2017 issued by the Respondent No. 1 (Annexure H).

ⅲ) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to take all steps as required by law to release the mortgaged properties and to hand over all documents of title that are held by the Respondents within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

iv) Grant such other reliefs as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity.''

1. (b) W.P.No.104118/2015 is filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:

'' i) Issue writ in the nature of Mandamus, direction or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the Respondents to act in accordance with the One Time Settlement as per Annexure-A dated 03/04/2001 and implement the scheme as per guidelines of RBI dated 03/09/2005 produced at Annexure-C in the interest of justice and equity.

ii) Grant such other reliefs as deemed fit in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity.''

1. (c) W.P.No.103732/2016 is filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:

''a. set aside the order dated 29.03.2016 in DCP No. 1420 in O.A. No. 458/1995 passed by the recovery officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal Bangalore Vide Annexure-A and allow the application dated 24-03- 2016 filed by the 1st and 2nd petitioner before the Recovery Officer, DRT at Annexure'E'

b. PASS any such other order/s with costs in the interests of justice and equity.''

2. An application had been filed by the State Bank of Mysore contending that the defendants therein, namely Tungabhadra Pulp and Board Mills Ltd., the petitioner herein, had availed credit facilities and had even hypothecated its assets. Default on the part of the borrower and its Directors had resulted in initiating the proceedings. The total due as on the date of filing of the said application was Rs.21,07,507.47/- with interest, current and future at 18% per annum, compounded quarterly.

3. By order dated 12.02.1999, the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Bengaluru, allowed the said application filed by State Bank of Mysore, directing issuance of the recovery certificate as prayed for. In furtherance to the said order, recovery certificate dated 20.05.2001 at Annexure-R5 was issued, the schedule of the recovery certificate reads as under:-

SCHEDULE OF THE RECOVERY CERTIFICATE

:

4. Thus, the amount due as on the date of the order dated 12.12.1999, is calculated in the certificate dated 20.05.2001 which amounted to Rs.83,10,758.50/-. It appears that certain correspondence ensued between the petitioner- borrower and the Respondent-Bank for the purpose of resolving the matter through One Time Settlement, which had also resulted the petitioner herein approaching this Court by filing a writ petition in W.P.No.104118/2015 seeking direction to implement Scheme as per the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India dated 03.09.2005. This Court vide an interim order dated 10.03.2016 directed the petitioner to deposit the sum of Rs.80,00,0