ANU SENTHIL Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner's husband had availed a housing loan from the first respondent for an amount of Rs.30,000,00/-. The petitioner's husband had also created an equitable mortgage in respect of his property in favour of the first respondent.

(2.) The petitioner has pleaded in the writ petition that her husband fell into grave financial crisis and that he is unable to pay off the monthly installments. In the above circumstances, the first respondent has declared the property as a non-performing asset and has affixed Ext.P3 possession notice on the property. The petitioner's husband is now out of station, he has instructed the petitioner to challenge the proceedings initiated by the respondent. Even though, the petitioner approached the first respondent seeking time to settle the outstanding amounts in installments, the first respondent has threatened to take possession of the property on or before 31.12.2019.

(3.) I have heard Sri.Alexander George, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Jowaher Jose, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.