OTS Scheme is a Non Discretionary one and applicable to one and all: DRAT Alows SBI’s Appeal
When the One Time Settlement Scheme was effective till 30th April, 2018 and a request was made by the Respondent for an extension of time which was duly considered and rejected by the Bank.
In a recent case, the Kolkata bench of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) allowed the appeal of the State Bank of India, holding that the One Time Settlement scheme is a nondiscretionary one and applicable to one and all. An appeal has filed challenging the judgment and order dated 21.2.2019, passed by DRT, Cuttack, allowing M.A. 09 of 2019. (State Bank of India -vs-...
In a recent case, the Kolkata bench of the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) allowed the appeal of the State Bank of India, holding that the One Time Settlement scheme is a nondiscretionary one and applicable to one and all.
An appeal has filed challenging the judgment and order dated 21.2.2019, passed by DRT, Cuttack, allowing M.A. 09 of 2019. (State Bank of India -vs- M/s. Kamyab Television Private Limited & Others). As per the pleadings of the parties, it appears that an O.A. was filed by the Bank for realization of a sum of Rs.5,81,26,384.02p wherein the Respondents No. 4 and 5 herein were a mortgagors. It appears from the record that the Respondent, namely, Manoj Dash, was in judicial custody in some matter.
Affective Ways Of Tax Planning for HUF, Partnership Firm and Will - Click Here
One OTS Scheme, being SBI One Time Settlement-2017 was floated by the Appellant Bank for settlement of N.P.A. and Aucas in Manufacturing Trade, Services and Agricultural Sector, being SBI OTS 2017, which was in force wherein the proposal for One Time Settlement was arrived at between the parties for an amount of Rs.9,00,804.00 at 35% of the OTS amount, i.e.
Rs.6,75,604.00 was deposited on 27.11.2007.
Last date for compliance under the Scheme was 30th April, 2018. Rest of the amount i.e. Rs.47,29,222.00 could not be deposited by the stipulated date, i.e. 30th April, 2018, and an extension was sought from the Bank which was refused. Thereafter, M.A. was filed before the DRT which was allowed by the DRT by passing the impugned order directing the Bank to collect the Demand Draft from the Respondent.
Tax Planning For Trusts and cooperation Societies - Click here
The Bank is entitled for 10% interest simple from 30th April, 2018 till 20th February, 2019 and the balance amount of OTS Rs.47,29,222.00 which is paid by the Respondent No. 2. Further interest is to be calculated by the Bank and to be informed to the Respondent which shall be deposited by him and notice shall be issued by the Bank.
Counsel for Appellant submitted that the Scheme was effective till 30th April, 2018 but the amount was not deposited by the Respondents. A request was made for extension of time which was duly replied and rejected vide letter dated 23.4.2018. Thereafter, Scheme expired on 30th April, 2018. DRT erred in passing the impugned order.
It is undisputed that SBI One Time Settlement Scheme was launched by the Bank which was non-discretionary and non discriminatory and was in force till 30th April, 2018. Respondents herein could not fulfill the conditions within the stipulated period and sought for extension of time which expired on 30th June, 2018 on the ground that some transactions and proposal of the Respondent are at final stage which may take some time accordingly time for making the deposit may be extended till 30th June, 2018.
A Miscellaneous application was filed by the Respondents on the ground that he was in judicial custody thereafter on release he fell ill and could not make the deposit. DRT was persuaded by this ground and allowed the application. It is held by the Apex Court in Bijnor Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Bijnor & Others -vs- Meena Agarwal & Others 2021 that in a case of OTS Scheme grant of benefit of OTS Scheme cannot be prayed as a matter of right and the same is subject to fulfilling the liability criteria mentioned in the Scheme. A procedure is set for grant of benefit of OTS Scheme to a Borrower.
Complete practical guide to Drafting Commercial Contracts, Click Here
Further, in the aforesaid case the High Court granted benefit under the OTS Scheme by issuing a Writ of Mandamus which was quashed by the Apex Court holding that the High Court failed to consider the Scheme in its true perspective and has issued a Writ of Mandamus as if the grant of benefit under the OTS Scheme can be claimed as a matter of right.
A single bench of Justice Anil Kumar Srivastava, Chairperson observed that when the One Time Settlement Scheme was effective till 30th April, 2018 and a request was made by the Respondent for an extension of time which was duly considered and rejected by the Bank, DRT was not within its jurisdiction to extend the time. It was a non-discretionary scheme which should have been and should be followed by one and all.
Since the impugned order suffers from material illegality, the tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by DRT, Cuttack.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
