PRATIMA B THAKKAR Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS both the petitions raise a common issue and emanate from a common set of facts, both the petitions are taken up for final hearing and disposal today. Rule. Learned Advocate for the respondent bank is directed to waive service.

(2.) THE petitioner of Special Civil Application No. 23904 of 2007 is the husband of petitioner of Special Civil Application No. 23595 of 2007. Both the petitioners have challenged two Notices dated 23. 09. 2004 and 16. 07. 2007 issued to each of the petitioners under the provisions of Section 13 (2) of The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (the Securitisation Act) by the respondent bank.

(3.) THE learned Advocate for the petitioner has raised the following three issues in each of the petitions : " (i) Whether it is open to the respondent-Bank to issue two Notices under the same section for the same purpose. (ii) Does the Notice issued by the respondent - Bank satisfy the ingredients of the Notice required by provisions of Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (3) of the Securitisation Act. (iii) The Notice issued by the respondent-Bank is in a standard proforma without scoring out the inapplicable portion and hence, is based on non-application of mind rendering the Notice bad in law. " however, the Court had issued Notice on 17. 09. 2007 only in relation to issue Nos. 2 and 3. The respondent Bank has filed Affidavit-in-Reply dated 19. 10. 2007 followed by further affidavit dated 11. 12. 2007.