FATHIMATH ZUHRA Vs. THE SYNDICATE BANK, PAIVALIKE BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER, SYNDICATE BANK AND B.M. ABOOBACKER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court when she is faced with notice under Section 13 (4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as SARFAESI Act). The owner of the property is one Sri. Aboobacker, husband of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, her husband had married another person and is living separately. The property secured is the property in which the petitioner and her children are residing. If further proceedings are taken, the petitioner will be thrown out to the streets. The petitioner submitted that she is ready and willing to discharge the debt of the bank so that she can continue to reside in the said property. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the bank submits that since no payment has been made, the bank was entitled to take appropriate proceedings for taking possession of the property under the SARFAESI Act and notice under Section 13(4) had been issued after complying with the procedure of issuance of notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. However, the learned Standing Counsel for the bank would submit that they are only interested in receiving the entire amount covered by the notice.

(2.) Having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the matter, especially the plight of the petitioner and her minor children, I am of the view that some indulgence has to be shown in favour of the petitioner especially in an instance were she is ready and willing to discharge the debt due to the bank so that it will enable her to reside in the premises which she is living. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of as under: