Writ Appeal No.564/2011 22.11.2011 Shri Asif Warsi, learned counsel for the appellant. Appellant is also present in person. Shri Anand Singh Bahrawat, learned counsel for respondent No.1 with Shri Mohit Diwan, Assistant Manager, of respondent No.1- ICICI Bank. With consent heard finally. This intra Court appeal is directed against the order dated 29.09.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.7311/2011. Before the writ Court, the appellant/petitioner had challenged the demand letter dated 05.08.2011 and the letter dated 11.08.2011 issued by the first respondent threating the appellant that if the balance amount of sale consideration is not deposited within the time stated therein, the EMD amount of Rs.30,00,000/- shall be forfeited. The learned Single Judge, taking note of the fact that the appellant had purchased the property in question on “as is where is and as is what is condition” basis and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner could not deposit the amount of sale consideration in time, declined interference in the writ petition. Today, learned counsel for the appellant as also the appellant made a categorical statement that the appellant is willing to deposit the balance amount but some more time may be granted for the same and the first respondent be 2 directed to deliver him the possession of the property. Learned counsel for the respondent and the officer of the respondent/bank submit that though the petitioner has purchased the property on “as is where is and as is what is condition”, still the respondent is ready to deliver the possession provided the petitioner deposits half of the balance amount within ten days and rest of the amount within a month thereafter. To the aforesaid proposal, the appellant submits that he is ready to deposit the balance amount but some more time would be required. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, we are inclined to dispose of this petition in following terms: - The appellant shall deposit 50% of the balance amount with the respondent/bank on or before 10.12.2011 and shall deposit the remaining amount on or before 25.01.2012. On such deposit being made, the first respondent shall deliver the possession of the property to the appellant/petitioner. In case, the possession could not be delivered by the first respondent within a week from the receipt of the entire amount, the entire amount as also the EMD amount, so deposited, shall be refunded by the first respondent to the petitioner with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of deposit till payment. 3 If the appellant makes a default of any of the conditions of deposit, as aforesaid, the first respondent will be free to sell the property in question to other intending buyers. In that event in regard to the return of the amount of EMD or any other amount deposited by the appellant/petitioner, the first respondent shall take an appropriate decision and shall communicate to the appellant/petitioner within four weeks of such default. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ appeal stands disposed of. No order as to costs. C. c. within 3 days. (Shantanu Kemkar) (Prakash Shrivastava) Judge Judge rcp