APHC010062642025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WRIT PETITION NO: 3509 of 2025 Bench Sr.No:-4 [3483] M/s. Sai Agro Industries ...Petitioner Vs. Indian Overseas Bank ...Respondent ********** Advocate for petitioner : Sri Venkateswara Rao Gudapati, learned counsel appearing for Sri G. Venkat Sailendra. Advocate for respondent : None CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 18th February 2025 P C : The petitioner proposed for One Time Settlement (O.T.S.) for Rs.16.35 crores to the Indian Overseas Bank, the respondent herein. The O.T.S. was entered into between the parties wherein it was agreed that subject to the petitioner paying 10% of the outstanding amount, the rest could be paid till 31.12.2024. 2. The petitioner claims that it had deposited 10% upfront amount of Rs.1.64 crores, yet, the rest of the amount of Rs.14.71 crores could not be paid before 31.12.2024 and therefore, sought extension of time but the same was refused. It is stated that in the meantime, the bank has resorted to the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and 2 Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) to auction the properties which are mortgaged with the respondent bank. 3. The petitioner’s argument is that in case some more time would be given by the bank for liquidating the balance amount of Rs.14.71 crores, the liability could be liquidated while the petitioner would retain the properties which are the secured assets with the respondent bank. 4. It appears from the record that the petitioner has clearly failed to honour the terms and conditions contained in the O.T.S. with the respondent bank. Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to satisfy us on any legal ground which would enable us to prevent the respondent bank from proceeding ahead under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. 5. Insofar as this Court is concerned, in its extraordinary writ jurisdiction, we are afraid we have no jurisdiction to extend time which was otherwise agreed to between the parties as per the O.T.S. The settlement conditions are exclusively within the domain of the contracting parties. 6. Be that as it may, we do not find any merit in the present petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ RAVI CHEEMALAPATI, J AMD 3 28 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CHIEF JUSTICE & HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT PETITION NO: 3509 of 2025 Dt: 18.02.2025 AMD