IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 20697 OF 2008 DATE OF DECISION : August 25, 2009. Parties Name Sh. Ramesh Kumar and another ...PETITIONERS VERSUS Punjab Financial Corporation and another ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH PRESENT: Mr. K.K.Aggarwal, Sr. Adv., with Mr. Kapil Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. G.S.Gill, Advocate, for respondent No. 2. JASBIR SINGH, J. (oral) ORDER: By filing this writ petition, petitioner has laid challenge to action of the respondents, in taking possession of the petitioner's unit for realization of the loan amount. It appears that after taking possession of the property, mentioned above, date of auction was also fixed to sell the same. When notice of motion was issued on December 9, 2008, following contention of counsel for the petitioners was noticed: “This petition seeks quashing of auction proceedings. Case of the petitioners is that they took amount of Rs. 23.27 lacs towards loan against mortgage of property. Some amount was paid but there was a default. On account of default of payment, Corporation took over the property of the petitioners CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 20697 OF 2008 -2- in December, 2007 and are proceeding to sell the same. It is submitted that the petitioners are willing to pay the entire amount as demanded, without prejudice to settling for lesser amount or having the appropriate amount determined in any other proceedings, within six months from today. It is further submitted that the petitioners may be given an opportunity to sell the property, in association with the Corporation, subject to sale amount being paid directly to the Corporation to the extent of its dues. The petitioners also undertake to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- within one month from today.” In reply to the notice, Shri Gill states that one time settlement scheme is in existence and if the petitioners move an application before the cut off date, the same shall be considered for settlement as per terms and conditions of the scheme. Counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners will move an application for settlement under the policy, floated by the respondents. In view of above, this writ petition has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly. However, liberty shall remain with the petitioners that in case settlement fails, they can get this writ petition revived by moving an application. ( Jasbir Singh ) Judge August 25, 2009. DKC