IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.1071 OF 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.6319 of 2008)

Union Bank of India & Anr.        ...Appellant(s)

Versus

 Sri Laxmidhar Nayak & Ors.       ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

Delay condoned.

Leave granted.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By the impugned order, the High Court has directed the borrower to pay

in  instalments  by  assuming  that  in  terms  of  One  Time  Settlement,  a  sum  of

Rs.14,60,000/-  was payable by the respondents to the Bank.   This assumption was

founded on letter dated 10th February, 2007, written by the Central Assistant Public

Information  Officer  of  the  Bank  in  response  to  an  application  made  by  Smt.

Manjulata Nayak under the Right to Information Act.  In that letter, the amount due

was shown as Rs.14,56,623/- as on 30th June, 2006.  We have gone through that letter

and find that the same does not contain any indication that the Bank had agreed for

One Time Settlement by accepting a sum of Rs.14,60,000/-. Therefore, the High Court

was not justified in relying upon that letter for compelling the Bank to accept the total

amount of Rs.14,60,000/-  by  ignoring that as on the date of order the

....2/-

- 2 -

outstanding dues were more than Rs.14,60,000/-. In this view of the matter, it will be

just and proper to remit the case to the High Court for fresh decision of the writ

petition filed by the respondents.

Accordingly,  the appeal is allowed,  impugned order is set aside and the

matter is remitted to the High Court to decide the matter afresh keeping in view the

outstanding dues of the Bank on the date of the order, which the High Court may

pass pursuant to this order.  

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, February 16, 2009.