9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1532X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ., Advs. For the Respondent : Sri. Gururaj Joshi, Adv. ORDER The petitioner is before this court seeking that the notice dated 26.10.2010 at Annexure-R be quashed. The petitioner is also seeking that a mandamus be issued to the respondent for considering the proposal of the petitioner No.1 for rescheduling the loan as per the letter dated 05.09.2010 at Annexure-Q to the petition. 2. The first ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gned herein and take action in accordance with law. 4. In the above background, when the matter was heard on the earlier date, this Court was of the opinion that any consideration by the respondents would arise only if the petitioner makes a firm commitment to pay the substantial sum to the respondents towards the amount due and thereafter seek an opportunity for rescheduling the loan. In that li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 crores would be paid on or before 31.01.2016. 6. At this point, it is relevant to take note of the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent with reference to the memo dated 03.02.2015 which had been filed in this petition. Learned counsel for the respondent would point out that even at an earlier point by addressing a communication dated 09.12.2014, the petitioner had undertake ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... second instalment being deposited, the request to be made by the petitioner for rescheduling would be considered in accordance with law. In view of the said clarification, it is needless to mention that if the first instalment of Rs. 3 crores is not deposited by 30.10.2015, the respondent would not be obliged to wait any further. In that view, the petitioner would not be entitled to seek for resc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
