V. V. S. RAO, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is a proprietary concern engaged in manufacture and supply of non- ferrus castlings. The petitioner obtained amount by way of loan from the respondent-Bank. As it was irregular in repayments, the bank filed a suit being o. S. No. 325 of 1995. The suit was decreed ex parte on 6-11-1996 and a preliminary decree was passed. The bank filed an application for final decree. At that stage, the petitioner appears to have filed I. A. No. 1068 of 1998 seeking to set aside the ex parte decree. The matter is pending at that stage. In the meanwhile, the. Reserve Bank of India (RBI) issued a circular bearing no. BP. BC. 11/21. 01. 040/99-00 dt. 27-7-2000 communicating to the Chairmen and managing Directors of Public Sector Banks certain guidelines for recovery of dues relating to non-performing assets of Public sector Banks. The petitioner therefore made a representation on 13-10-2000 proposing to accept one-time settlement under RBI circular. In his representation he proposed the following. As per the Decree, the amount due is: (i) Suit claim Rs. 5,65,405-00 (ii) (a) Int. on 5,65,405® 16% p. m. from 21-4-1995 to 6-11-96 + (b) Int, on 5,65,405 @ 6% p. m. from 6-11-96 to 6-11-2000 Rs. 2,78,631-58 (iii) Costs of Suit Rs. 17,073-00 Rs. 8,61,109-58 We propose: Rs. 5,00,000 (i) Compromise amount in terms of RBI Circular No. BP. BC/11/21. 1. 040/99-20 (ii) Payable as follows: (a) 25% down payment on receipt of principle Agreement letter Rs. 1,00,000 (b) I Instalment i. e. Sm. from (a) Rs. 1,00,000 (c) II Instalment i. e. 3m-from (b) Rs. 1,00,000 (d) III Instalment i. e3m. from{c) Rs. 1,00,000 (e) IV Instalment i. e. 3m. from (d) Rs. 1,00,000 ( 2 ) AS there is no response from the respondents, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to the first respondent Bank to consider the representation in accordance with the RBI circular. After receiving notice, the respondents appeared through S. R. James representing Sri K. Srinivasa Murthy. According to the learned counsel, in cases where decrees are obtained by the Public sector Banks the scheme of one-time settlement has no application. He placed reliance on Part A (i) of the guidelines which reads as under: (A) Guidelines for recovery of NPAs upto Rs. 5. According to the learned counsel, in cases where decrees are obtained by the Public sector Banks the scheme of one-time settlement has no application. He placed reliance on Part A (i) of the guidelines which reads as under: (A) Guidelines for recovery of NPAs upto Rs. 5. 00 crores: [i] Coverage (a) The revised guidelines will cover all npas in all sectors irrespective of the nature of business, which have become doubtful or loss as on 31st march, 1997 with outstanding balance of Rs. 5. 00 crores and below on the cut off date. (b) The guidelines will also cover npas classified as sub-standard as on 31st March, 1997, which have subsequently become doubtful or loss category. (c) These guidelines will also cover cases pending before Courts/ drts/bifr, subject to consent decree, being obtained from the courts/drts/bifr. (d) Cases of wilful default, fraud and malfeasance will not be covered. (e) The revised guidelines will remain operative only upto 31st March, 2001. ( 3 ) A reading of the above guidelines would show that the guidelines will only cover cases where Court cases are pending and in case the banks obtained decrees, the same have no application. Though the petitioner herein filed an interlocutory application seeking to set aside the ex parte decree till the decree is set aside it cannot be said that the suit is still pending. In that view of the matter, it must be held that RBI guidelines have no application to the petitioner s case. ( 4 ) IN the result the writ petition is dismissed.