Telangana High Court
WP/40530/2014 of Mrs.Katragadda Beena W/o Mr.Satya Sai, Vs The General Manager-cum-Authorised Officer on 30 December 2014
SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU AND THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS WRIT PETITION No.40530 OF 2014 ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu) This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings, dated 30.01.2014, i.e., demand notice issued by the respondent Bank under Section 13(2) of the
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANUAND
THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS
WRIT PETITION No.40530 OF 2014
ORDER:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu)
This writ petition is filed challenging the proceedings, dated30.01.2014, i.e., demand notice issued by the respondent Bank underSection 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of FinancialAssets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, “theSARFAESI Act”).
2. It is stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition thatthe petitioner is a partner of M/s.Vasantha Wines along with twoothers; that in the year 2006, the firm obtained term loan of Rs.5.00lakhs for business needs; that the petitioner mortgaged her immovableproperties to secure the outstandings in the said credit facility; that asthe firm failed to pay the amounts, the respondent Bank filedO.S.No.152 of 2008 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Repalle forrecovery of Rs.7,31,806/- with interest and other charges and the samewas decreed on 23.06.2011; that while the matter stood thus, therespondent Bank issued demand notice under Section 13(2) of theSARFAESI Act on 30.01.2014 demanding to pay an amount ofRs.26,43,360/- as on 30.09.2013. Hence, the present writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in spite ofgiving reply to the aforementioned demand notice, no action has beentaken by the respondent Bank and hence, he prays to admit the writpetition.
4. The purpose of issuing notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act is to enable the borrower to pay the amount due to thebank giving two months’ time. If the borrower fails to pay that amountor fails to give any reply, then the Bank can proceed further. Since theimpugned notice issued by the respondent Bank is a notice callingupon the petitioner to discharge the outstanding amount payable to it,the writ petition is pre-mature and is liable to be dismissed.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, this orderwill not come in the way of the petitioner in approaching appropriateForum after issuance of notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESIAct by the respondent Bank. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall standclosed.
______________________
JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
Date: 30.12.2014AMD
_______________
JUSTICE ANIS
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
AND
THE HON’BLE MRS JUSTICE ANIS
WRIT PETITION No.40530 OF 2014
DATE: 30.12.2014
AMD