Judgment :- (Writ Appeal has been filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against order dated 01-03-2005 made in W.P.No. 4320 of 2004 passed by Single Judge of this Court.) P. Sathasivam, J. The Writ Appeal has been filed against order of the learned Single Judge dated 01-03-2005 made in Writ Petition No. 4320/2004 in and by which the learned Judge after quashing the proceedings of Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation (TIIC), Theni Branch dated 3-11-2004, directed them to return the title documents to the writ petitioner under Loan Account No. 3671179-0 and 3650043-0. 2. According to the appellants/TIIC, they sanctioned a term loan of Rs.5.50 lakhs to the writ petitioner/respondent herein originally at the rate of interest of 19.25 per cent and subsequently the same was reduced to 18.50 per cent. The soft loan of Rs.1 lakh was sanctioned at the rate of 1 per cent. The respondent was irregular in payment of the loan and ultimately committed default. The respondent had paid only a sum of Rs.5000/- towards principal upto 31-3-2003. In the meantime, the respondent approached the appellants for one time settlement. The appellants, after considering the request of the respondent, on 2-6-2003 sanctioned one time settlement under Regular OTS Scheme to the respondent by giving waiver concession to the tune of Rs.2,75,149/- and directed the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.6,32,675/- towards Term Loan and Rs.1,00,000/- with interest towards the Soft Loan as one time settlement within a period of 30 days. The respondent failed to pay one time settlement amount in time as stipulated by the appellants in their letter dated 2-6-2003. However, in the period between 11-7-2003 to 31-3-2004 the respondent has paid a sum of Rs.6,65,000/- in total on various dates. 3. The respondent was called for review meeting by the 2nd appellant on 16-7-2004, in the said meeting he (respondent) had agreed to settle the loan account on or before 31-8-2004 by remitting broken period interest. In the meantime, the appellant Corporation by its Circular No.6 dated 10-6-2003, introduced a new scheme for one time settlement namely ND and ND Scheme. By Circular No.12 dated 22-7-2003, certain clarifications were issued, whereby it is made clear that the persons who were sanctioned waiver concession under regular one time settlement scheme prior to the implementation of the ND and ND Scheme were not eligible for waiver concession under ND and ND Scheme. By Circular No.12 dated 22-7-2003, certain clarifications were issued, whereby it is made clear that the persons who were sanctioned waiver concession under regular one time settlement scheme prior to the implementation of the ND and ND Scheme were not eligible for waiver concession under ND and ND Scheme. However, by Circular No.20 dated 23-12-2003, the benefit under the ND and ND Scheme was also extended to the units which were availed waiver concession under Regular one time settlement scheme prior to the implementation of the ND and ND Scheme and remain settled. The said Circular No.20 was introduced only on 23-12-2003 and till then Circular No.12 dated 22-7-2003 was in force, whereby the respondent is not entitled to any benefit under the ND and ND Scheme. The offer given by the appellants for one time settlement under the Regular one time settlement scheme is under a contract, the respondent having accepted the offer and failed to fulfill his obligation cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own delay and seek benefit under the subsequent developments that had taken place. The learned Single Judge committed an error in allowing the writ petition and directing the appellants to return the title deeds. Hence the appellants preferred the above Writ Appeal. 4. The only point for consideration in this Appeal is, whether the respondent/writ petitioner is entitled to the benefit under the ND and ND Scheme as provided in Circular No.20 dated 23-12-2003; and the learned Judge is right in accepting the case of the writ petitioner. 5. Mr. V. Kalyanaraman, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, vehemently contended that inasmuch as ND and ND Scheme came into effect on 10-6-2003-vide Circular No.6, the respondent is not entitled to be considered under that Scheme for one time settlement. He also contended that as per the clarification issued by the appellants in Circular No.12 dated 22-7-2003, there is a positive restriction to the effect that persons who were sanctioned waiver concession under regular one time settlement scheme, prior to the implementation of the ND and ND Scheme, were not eligible for waiver concession under ND and ND Scheme, and that only as per Circular No.20 dated 23-12-2003, the said scheme was extended to persons who had already availed one time settlement under the regular OTS scheme. We have gone through the relevant Circulars, namely, Circular No.6, 12 and 20 as well as the impugned order of the learned Single Judge dated 1-3-2005. As rightly pointed out by Mr. M. Ajmal Khan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, in view of the categorical information given in Circular No.20 dated 23-12-2003, the respondent is entitled to avail the waiver concession under ND and ND Scheme and that the same was rightly considered and accepted by the learned Single Judge. The following information in that Circular (Circular No.20) are relevant: "THE TAMIL NADU INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT COROPRATION LIMITED 692, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035. CIRCULAR No.20 xx It was ascertained that units who have drawn loans between Rs.5.00 lakhs and Rs.10.00 lakhs and granted waiver concessions under the regular OTS scheme still remain settled for more than 3 to 5 years and they are now seeking waiver concessions under the present ND & ND policy, as they find the present policy is advantageous to them. Some of the Branches have also indicated that many borrowers may come forward for immediate settlement, if they are considered under the present ND & ND policy. The subject matter was discussed at the Board Meeting held on 16-12-2003 and the Board has decided that the units for loans between Rs.5.00 and Rs.10.00 lakhs and who had opted for settlement prior to the implementation of the present ND & ND policy, i.e., 10-6-2003 may also be permitted to settle their account under the current ND & ND policy and the minimum settlement amount shall be arrived as per the settlement formula approved by the Board for the present ND & ND policy for loans between Rs.5.00 lakhs and Rs.10.00 lakhs. As the validity period of the policy is expiring on 31-12-03, the Branch Managers are advised to secure settlement from these cases before the end of December 2003. Kindly acknowledge receipt. Sd/- x x x General Manager (Rec.)" It is not in dispute that the Appellant Corporation sanctioned the loan within the limit and the respondent herein opted for settlement prior to the date of implementation of ND & ND Scheme i.e., on 10-6-2003. In such a circumstance, as per the second paragraph of Circular No.20, the respondent is entitled to settle their account under ND and ND Scheme. In such a circumstance, as per the second paragraph of Circular No.20, the respondent is entitled to settle their account under ND and ND Scheme. It is clear that this Circular (Circular No. 20) is not only applicable to the persons who availed loan from 23-12-2003, but also to those who opted for settlement prior to the implementation of the ND and ND Scheme. In this regard, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has placed the following details of accounts settled under ND and ND scheme: "DETAILS OF ACCOUNT SETTLED UNDER ND & ND SCHEME Loan Amount (Term Loan) : Rs.5,50,000.00 Formula of Settlement Under : Principal outstanding and interest ND & ND Scheme by circular outstanding as on Date on which the account No.6 dated 10-06-2003 was categorized as NPA (Non Performing Asset) The Date on which the petitioner unit was categorised as NPA : 31-05-1999 Interest outstanding (as on date of NPA) : Rs.2,06,300.00 Principal outstanding : Rs.5,50,0000.00 Interest paid after that date and before 10-6-2003 (when ND & ND Scheme came) : Rs.5,02,775.00 Actual interest payable : Rs.2,06,300.00 Paid : Rs.5,02,775.00 -------------- Excess amount paid to interest Rs.2,96,365.00 -------------- Principal paid after 10-6-2003 (when ND & ND scheme came) From 10-6-2003 to 23-12-2003 : Rs.2,70,000.00 } } Amount remitted on or after 23-12-2003 Rs.3,00,000.00 } Rs.5,70,000.00 -------------- } Rs.5,70,000.00 } -------------- } Actual principal payable Rs.5,50,000.00 -------------- Excess paid Rs.20,000.00 -------------- Under circular No.12:- The amount paid (prior to the implementation of ND & ND scheme i.e., before 10-6-2003) to interest cannot be adjusted towards the principal." 6. In the light of the language used in Circular No.20, considering the fact that the first respondent also availed one time settlement prior to ND and ND Scheme and in view of the clarification issued by the appellants and also taking note of the details of accounts settled under ND and ND Scheme by the respondent, we are unable to accept the stand taken by the appellants. On the other hand, we are in agreement with the conclusion arrived at by the learned Judge. 7. In the light of our discussion, we do not find any merit in the Appeal; consequently the same is dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.