High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/15674/2018dismissed

M/S Mrb Engineers And Contractors Private Ltd And ORS v. Authorized Officer Canara Bank And ORS

2018-07-02Mr. Justice R.C. Kathuria (Retd.),Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 15674 of 2018 Decided on : 02.07.2018 M/s MRB Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. and others . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

Authorized Engineer, Canara Bank and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN PRESENT: Mr. Diwan Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Gaurav Goel, Advocate for respondents No. 1 & 2 - Canara Bank.

**** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, A.C.J. (Oral) The petitioners have approached this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking direction to the respondents to reconsider the revised OTS proposal dated 25.05.2018 of the petitioners in accordance with the Recovery/OTS Policy currently prevalent with the respondent Bank being a nondiscretionary and non-discriminatory scheme framed by the Bank under the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India. Petitioners have also prayed for quashing of the order dated 03.01.2018 (Annexure P-5) passed by the District Magistrate, Panchkula, in SARFAESI Case No.110 of 22.12.2017, whereby, Tehsildar, Panchkula has been appointed as Duty Magistrate for maintenance of law and order during the possession of the mortgaged properties of the petitioners. Besides, a further prayer has also been made for quashing of the order dated 18.01.2018, passed by the Presiding Officer, DRT-II, Chandigarh, whereby, interim prayer for staying the order of the District Magistrate has been declined. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia states that the petitioners are prepared to settle the amount under the One Time Settlement Scheme for Jawala Ram 2018.07.05 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No. 15674 of 2018 - 2 - `5,82,00,000/-. It was further stated that the petitioners are prepared to pay the 10% amount within seven days and 25% amount within one month thereafter to show their bona fides.

After arguing for sometime, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he may be allowed to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Bank or the appropriate Forum. 4.

Dismissed as withdrawn. It shall, however, be open to the petitioners to take recourse to the remedies as may be available to them, in accordance with law.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (AVNEESH JHINGAN) JUDGE July 02, 2018 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No Jawala Ram 2018.07.05 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh