2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 48843
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
JAMAL P.A – Appellant
Versus
THE MUVATTUPUZHA PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD. NO. 4389 – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 25984 OF 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners:
For the Respondents:
The court directed the respondent bank to consider the petitioner's application for a One Time Settlement (OTS) in accordance with the applicable scheme and law.
Headnote:(A) One Time Settlement (OTS) - Consideration of Application - Direction to the respondent bank to consider the petitioner's application for OTS in accordance with the existing scheme and law. (Para 3)
Issues: Whether the respondent bank should be directed to consider the petitioner's application for One Time Settlement.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks consideration of a one time settlement application to prevent the sale of mortgaged property. (Para 1 , 2) |
JUDGMENT
1. The petitioner availed credit facilities from the 1st respondent Bank. On default being committed, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under the provisions of the Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Act, 1984 and the mortgaged property was brought to sale. Ext.P3 is a sale notice dated 08.02.2023 pertaining to the sale of the mortgaged property.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that though the sale was notified as early as on 08.02.2023, the sale of the mortgaged property has not taken place till now. The petitioner is before this Court stating that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 application for One Time Settlement in terms of Ext.P1 scheme and the same may be directed to be considered immediately as the scheme is in force only till 30.08.2026.
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that taking into consideration the limited nature of relief now sought by the petitioner, this writ petition can be disposed of without notice to the respondents as no order to the prejudice of the respondents is being issued by this Court. Since it is stated that the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 representation seeking the benefit of Ext.P1 scheme, there will be a direction to the respondents to consider Ext.P2, in accordance with the law and in terms of the One Time Settlement scheme that is stated to be in force and intimate to the petitioner the amount to be paid by the petitioner under the One Time Settlement scheme [if any such One Time Settlement is offered to the petitioner]. I make it clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim raised by the petitioner and it will be open to the competent authority to take a decision on Ext.2 keeping in mind the terms of the One Time Settlement scheme (if any) now in force. The petitioner shall produce a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance within one week from today (29.07.2026).
Writ petition will stand disposed of as above.