ARTICLE
7 October 2025

28 OTS Is Not A Right: Supreme Court Upholds Bank Discretion In Loan Settlements (Podcast)

AP
AK & Partners

Contributor

AK & Partners is a full-service law firm, whose expertise spans diverse practice areas, including Banking and Finance, Dispute Resolution, Transaction Advisory and Funds, Data Privacy, Tax, and regulatory compliance. Our services are offered across different legal forums and jurisdictions, including the USA, the UK, Singapore, Italy, Spain, Sri Lanka, etc.
In this Lexpresso special, we decode the Supreme Court's ruling in Assistant General Manager, SBI & Anr. v. Tanya Energy Enterprises, which clarifies borrower rights...
India Finance and Banking

In this Lexpresso special, we decode the Supreme Court's ruling in Assistant General Manager, SBI & Anr. v. Tanya Energy Enterprises, which clarifies borrower rights under One-Time Settlement (OTS) schemes. The Court held that defaulting borrowers have no legal entitlement to demand OTS benefits unless they fully meet the scheme's eligibility conditions—including upfront payments. Importantly, even if a bank cites one reason for rejection, courts can uphold the decision on any valid ground in the record. This landmark ruling underscores that OTS schemes are voluntary concessions, not enforceable rights, reaffirming banks' discretion in managing non-performing loans.

A must-listen for lenders, borrowers, and insolvency professionals navigating India's debt recovery landscape.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More