IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.2475 of 2009 Date of Decision : October 04, 2010. M/s Sohan Singh Ujjagar Singh .....Petitioner versus Punjab Financial Corporation and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.M.K.Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.S.S.Toor, Advocate, for the respondents. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner-firm had taken a loan of Rs.10 lacs from the respondent-Corporation to set up a Rice Sheller in the year 1992. As the loan amount was not repaid in time, its accounts were seized. The Corporation, thereafter launched One Time Settlement Scheme on 30.3.2001 (Annexure P-1) and the petitioner-firm applied for settlement of its accounts under the said Scheme. Vide memo dated 3.3.2006, (Annexure P-2), the petitioner was asked to deposit a sum of Rs.16,26,238/- with further interest from 31.12.2005 subject to approval of the competent authority. The petitioner admittedly deposited Rs.17.50 lacs i.e. Rs.14.50 lacs on 14.6.2006 and Rs.3.00 lacs on 16.6.2006. Even after C.W.P.No .2475 of 2009 2 receipt of said payment, the respondent-Corporation vide the impugned order dated 25.9.2007 (Annexure P-6) has declined to accept the One Time Settlement and has raised its claim against the petitioner for a sum of Rs.82.14 lacs alongwith further interest. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and perused the records. In my considered view, the controversy in this case stands answered in favour of the petitioner by a Division Bench of this Court vide decision dated 10.4.2008 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.11385 of 2007 (M/s Bharaj Industries versus Punjab Financial Corporation and another), the operative part whereof reads as under:- “....8. The account of the petitioner is liable to be settled by the respondent-Corporation as per the OTS Scheme. Since the entire OTS amount stands deposited by the petitioner on 24.10.2006, the respondent-Corporation is restrained from making any further demand in this regard. However, it is made clear that the petitioner was liable to clear the entire OTS amount on 30.4.2005 and there is delay in making the entire payment which has been made admittedly on 24.10.2006, therefore, the petitioner is liable to pay simple interest at the rate of Rs.12% per annum for the balance OTS amount paid after 30.4.2005 till the date of payment i.e. 24.10.2006. Accordingly, the respondent- Corporation may work out the said amount and inform the petitioner of this amount through registered post and the petitioner shall pay the said amount within one month on receipt of such information from the respondent- Corporation.....” C.W.P.No .2475 of 2009 3 For the reasons assigned in M/s Bharaj Industries's case (Supra), the writ petition is allowed and the impugned communication dated 25.9.2007 (Annexure P-6) is quashed. The respondent-corporation is directed to work out the amount, if any, payable by the petitioner as per the OTS alongwith simple interest, which the petitioner shall deposit within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the details from the Corporation. On clearance of all the dues, the Title Deeds earlier deposited by the petitioner shall be released. Dasti. October 04, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE