Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4.Immediately by coming to know of the fact that the property is under a cloud, the petitioner had approached TIIC and come to know that TIIC had proceeded as against the original partnership firm for recovery of the amount outstanding. The loans in question had been availed in 1993, (1)an industrial loan, wherein, the principal was a sum of Rs.5,07,000/- and (2)a machinery loan, the principal being a sum of Rs.4,54,000/-. The property in question had been offered as collateral security towards the latter.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5.The borrower had been a partnership firm comprising four individuals, Balachandran, Kumaresan, Sivasubramanian and their mother. One Kumaresan could not be traced and the Writ Petitioner had come to know that Balachandran had absconded to Singapore. Despite efforts having been taken in the Embassy office at Singapore, TIIC was unable to proceed further in the matter for want of full address in Singapore. Sivasubramanian, the third partner had approached TIIC individually making some efforts to settle the loan. Apart from him, the petitioner and his vendor Manickam had made efforts in that direction.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

7.Original records have been produced before us and we have heard the detailed submissions of Mr.R.Saravanan, learned Counsel for TIIC and Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai, learned Counsel for R3 and R5. We note that TIIC has been evidently negotiating with all stakeholders in the transactions, ie., Sivasubramanian, erstwhile partner of the defaulting firm, as well as Manickam and the Writ Petitioner separately.

9.The proposal for OTS scheme was issued by TIIC only to the three partners in the defaulting partnership firm, ie., Kumaresan, Balachandran and Sivasubramanian and the Writ Petitioner was https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis completely in the dark as far as the OTS was concerned. We are of the considered view that this procedure followed by TIIC is inappropriate and incorrect. As on 29.09.2006 when the proposal for OTS was issued, they have been in negotiation with the Writ Petitioner recovering a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- from him.