Dismissed

Yogaraja.K v. the State Bank of India

Madras HC19 Aug 2021WP(MD)/14860/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench dismissed two writ petitions filed by borrowers seeking a mandatory direction under Article 226 for the State Bank of India to accept their One Time Settlement proposals. The Court held that while banks may consider representations in full form per prior guidelines, they cannot be compelled to accept OTS proposals, and no fresh direction was warranted.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were dismissed; no direction was given to the Bank to accept the OTS proposal.

Yogaraja.K Vs the State Bank of India — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P(MD)Nos.14860 & 14861 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.08.2021 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY AND

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶5

W.P(MD)Nos.14860 & 14861 of 2021 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.11768 & 11770 of 2021 1.W.P(MD)No.14860 of 2021:-

¶6

1.K.Yogaraja 2.Y.Sangeetha ... Petitioners Vs.

¶7

The State Bank of India, Thuraiyur – 621 010, Trichy District, Rep. by its Branch Manager. ... Respondent

¶8

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners, dated 04.08.2021.

¶9

2.W.P(MD)No.14861 of 2021:-

¶10

1.Y.Sangeetha 2.K.Yogaraja ... Petitioners Vs.

¶11

The State Bank of India, Thuraiyur – 621 010, Trichy District, Rep. by its Branch Manager. ... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioners, dated 04.08.2021.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Singan (In both W.Ps') For Respondent : Mr.M.Ponniah (In both W.Ps')

¶14

COMMON ORDER

¶15

(Order of the Court was made by M.DURAISWAMY,J. )

¶16

The petitioners have filed the above Writ Petitions to issue Writs of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the representations of the petitioners, dated 04.08.2021.

¶17

2.Since the issues involved in both the Writ Petitions are https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

1/2

¶19

W.P(MD)Nos.14860 & 14861 of 2021

¶20

common, the Writ Petitions are disposed of by this common order.

¶21

3.It is the case of the petitioners that they gave representations, dated 04.08.2021 to the respondent Bank for availing One Time Settlement (OTS) scheme.

¶22

4.It is settled position that the respondent Bank cannot be compelled to accept the OTS proposal given by the borrower for the guarantor.

¶23

5.Earlier, the petitioners have filed W.P(MD)Nos.11549 and 11550 of 2021 and the Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 13.07.2021, disposed of the Writ Petitions observing that if the representations are given in full form, it is open to the respondent Bank to consider the same in accordance with the relevant guidelines.

¶24

6.When the petitioners have already filed Writ Petitions and got such observation, we do not find any reason to give one more direction to the respondent Bank. So far as OTS proposal is concerned, the respondent Bank has to decide the same in accordance with the Rules. Therefore, we are not inclined to grant the relief sought for in the Writ Petitions. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶25

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶26

¶27

Note :

¶28

In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned.

¶29

¶30

The Branch Manager, The State Bank of India, Thuraiyur – 621 010, Trichy District.

¶31

W.P(MD)Nos.14860 & 14861 of 2021 19.08.2021

¶32

RD(1.09.2021) 2P 2C

¶33

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶34

2/2

Yogaraja.K v. the State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogaraja.K v. the State Bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

J.Vimal Edward Dhas Vs M.Kabeer

N.Manikandan Vs the Commissioner of Corporation

V. Udayalakshmi Vs the General Manager

T.Suji Vs The Superintendent of Police

I.Parimala Devi, Vs State of Tamilnadu

K.Ganesan Vs The Superintendent of Police