One-time settlement under RBI guidelines cannot be compelled when the offer is belated and scheme exclusions apply.

A borrower cannot compel a bank to accept a belated one-time settlement offer under RBI guidelines after the scheme period has expired, especially where parallel proceedings are pending before the DRT. The court noted factual findings of delay, alienation of secured assets, and conduct indicative of wilful default, fraud and malfeasance, which the scheme excluded. It also observed that the offer was materially below the settlement basis contemplated by the guidelines. On those facts, the bank's rejection was not liable to be interfered with and no enforceable right to settlement arose.

---

---

Issues: Whether the bank's rejection of the request for one-time settlement under RBI guidelines was liable to be quashed and whether the petitioner could compel the bank to accept the settlement offer.

Analysis: The request for settlement was made after the operative period of the RBI scheme had ended. The petitioner had also approached the court after pursuing other proceedings, while an identical application remained pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. On the facts found, the borrower had shown a consistent pattern of delay, alienation of secured assets, and conduct falling within wilful default, fraud and malfeasance, which the scheme itself excluded. The amount offered was also far below the settlement basis contemplated under the guidelines.

Conclusion: The petitioner had no enforceable right to compel acceptance of the belated settlement offer, and the bank's rejection was not liable to be interfered with.

---