JUDGMENT

As per the interim order dated 15.11.2021, petitioner was directed to deposit an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- before 15.12.2021. The learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the said amount has been deposited. 2. Though the reliefs sought for in this writ petition are manifold, during the course of argument, the learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.Jai George confined his submissions for an opportunity to avail of the one time settlement from the respondents. He referred to Ext.P5 representation submitted by the petitioner, requesting for the grant of one time settlement.

3. Adv.P.Haridas, the learned counsel for the respondents upon instructions submitted that since the petitioner has complied with the conditions imposed in the order dated 15.11.2021, the bank is willing to consider the grant of a one time settlement which was in fact intimated to him as a reply to Ext.P5. The learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that if the petitioner approaches the respondent bank within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the respondent bank shall be willing to consider the grant of one time settlement.

4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to approach the respondent bank with a feasible proposal for one time settlement. If such an application is filed within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the respondents shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon with intimation to the petitioner within 15 days thereafter. Till such a decision as directed is taken, the respondents shall not proceed with any coercive proceedings against the petitioner. Since the respondent bank had already initiated proceedings under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, the said proceedings shall also be kept in abeyance till a decision is taken by the bank as directed in this judgment. The proceedings will thereafter depend upon the outcome of the one time settlement proposal to be submitted by the petitioner.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE RKM APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25357/2021 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 07/07/2021 UNDER SECTION 13(2) OF THE SECURITIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002 DEMANDING RS. 43,05,259/- ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF CIRCULAR NO.32/2021, ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ON

13/08/2021.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 30/08/2021 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER REGARDING THE ANNOUNCEMENT OTS SCHEME.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 03/11/2021 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN MC NO.168/2021 ON THE FILES OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, KOTTAYAM.

Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED

12/11/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.