CWP NO.3033 OF 1988 :1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 15.12.2008 Shama Woollens Limited ...Petitioner VERSUS Punjab Financial Corporation …Respondent CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Mr.Vipal Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.G.s.Gill, Advocate for the respondent Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) The petitioner-Company applied for loan for its proposed project to the respondent-Corporation prior to June, 1986. It appears that on consideration of the loan application of the petitioner, respondent-Corporation vide its letter dated 5.6.1986 (Annexure P-1) CWP NO.3033 OF 1988 :2: sanctioned loan amount of Rs.50.00 lacs against machinery and another amount of Rs.10.00 lacs against the Central and State subsidy, subject to sanction of the same by the State Level Committee totaling Rs.60.00 lacs and further subject to certain conditions incorporated in the letter of sanction itself. It appears that there was some inspection held by the respondent-Corporation and it came to their notice that there was a dispute between the Directors. Accordingly, vide letter dated 4.12.1986 (Annexure P-2), the respondent-Corporation informed the petitioner to settle the dispute amongst the Directors to enable the Corporation to process the loan. Vide letter dated 16.1.1987 (Annexure P-3), the petitioner-Company informed the respondent-Corporation that new Directors were engaged to the Board of Directors of the Company. The respondent-Corporation granted the approval to the new Board of Directors vide its letter dated 19.2.1987 (Annexure P-4). It appears that due to certain reasons, the loan could not be disbursed. The petitioner-Company accordingly filed this petition seeking issuance of writ of mandamus to the respondent-Corporation for disbursement of the loan amount invoking the doctrine of promissory estoppel. The petitioner-Company also sought a direction against the CWP NO.3033 OF 1988 :3: respondent-Corporation not to recover the commitment charges of Rs.28,520/- as communicated to the petitioner-Company vide Annexure P-9. This petition is pending for the last about 20 years. The cost for the project for which the loan was asked for and sanctioned must have multiplied many times. With the passage of time, it is not feasible to issue writ of mandamus sought for or even to enforce the alleged compromise. Otherwise also, the doctrine of promissory estoppel itself is equitable in nature and with the lapse of 20 years, it is not possible to enforce such a promise. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner-Company submits that the petitioner-Company has spent huge amounts on construction of the plant and project and on purchase of some machinery and equipments etc. He has referred to Annexure P-27 wherein an amount of Rs.16,18,536.05 seems to have been spent. It is not known whether plant machinery or other equipment etc. are still intact or have been sold by the petitioner-Company. In any case, most of the amounts have been spent on purchase of land and the building. The cost of the land and the building must have multiplied many times. After 20 years, it is not possible to accede to the prayer of the petitioner for damages. In view of the above circumstances, I CWP NO.3033 OF 1988 :4: feel that this petition has been rendered infructuous with the passage of time. Disposed of as such. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 15.12.2008 MFK CWP NO.3033 OF 1988 :5: