JUDGMENT

The 1^st petitioner is an eye care hospital, which is run by the 2^nd petitioner, who had obtained a loan from the 1^st respondent Bank for the construction of a hospital building in the year 2005. During 2009, there was an outstanding of around Rs.48 lakhs towards interest. At the request of the petitioner, the loan obtained was restructured by converting the outstanding interest of around Rs.48 lakhs into a separate loan account. A reference to Ext.P1 would show that the aforesaid separate loan account so created did not visualise the petitioners remitting any amount towards interest. It specifically states that the rate of interest would be zero.

2. Later, during 2015, the petitioner decided to shift the term loan obtained from the 1^st respondent to another financial institution, and a request was also made before the 1^st respondent. In reply, the Bank informed the petitioner through Ext.P3 about the outstanding payable by the petitioner, which did not includ