State Bank Of India vs The Debts Recovery Tribunal ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 933 AP

        HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

MAIN CASE No.: W.P.Nos.27923 & 28695 of 2021

                             PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.No
                                             ORDER

DATE

10. 21.2.2022 CPK, J & VS, J

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the giving direction to respondent No.2 to pay 20% of the amount within six months is illegal and incorrect. He further submits that the request of respondent No.2 for OTS came to be rejected in the month of February, 2022 itself and in spite of the same, not even a single E.M.I. has been paid till date. Relying upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, he would contend that granting of OTS is discretion of the bank and there cannot be a positive direction to the bank to grant OTS. He further submits that the account of respondent No.2 is a fraudulent one and that necessary steps have been taken by lodging a report before the A.C.B. and a crime has been registered against him.

At this stage, learned counsel for respondent No.2 sought time to verify the same.

List on 22.2.2022.

___________ CPK, J

___________ VS, J AMD