A VARALAKSHMI Vs. CHIEF MANAGER PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition raises the following questions:-

(2.) As the borrowers had not repaid the loan amounts, the Bank filed O.A. No. 213 of 2004, impleading the individual borrowers as well as the petitioner and her husband, for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2,05,52,585.25 together with further interest at the rate of 19 percent per annum from 8.7.2004 till the date of re-payment. The said O.A. was defended by the petitioner among others by filing a written statement and inter alia contending that the guarantees stood discharged for renewal of the facilities without the consent of the guarantor. While the said O.A. was pending, the Bank invoked the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, 'the SARFAESI Act') and issued a notice dated 15.12.2004 under Section 13(2) to the petitioner demanding the payment of unpaid loan amount within a period of sixty days. Though the petitioner sent an elaborate reply, the Bank failed to consider the same and issued the notice dated 22.3.2005 under Section 13(4) and took symbolic possession of the secured asset on 24.7.2008. After the symbolic possession was taken, the Bank issued the sale notice, which was questioned by the husband of the petitioner before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I in S.A. No. 62 of 2009. The said sale notice was finally set aside by the Tribunal. Thereafter, the Bank again issued another sale notice dated 21.7.2009. Challenging the said notice, the petitioner filed S.A. No. 171 of 2009 before the very same Tribunal and obtained an interim order of stay. In view of the grant of stay, the Bank withdrew the sale notice. Since the sale notice was withdrawn by the Bank, the petitioner also withdrew the S.A. No. 171 of 2009.

(3.) Subsequently, the Bank issued another sale notice dated 16.4.2010. The petitioner along with her husband questioned the said sale notice also by filing S.A. No. 130 of 2010 before the very same Tribunal and obtained an interim order of stay of confirmation of sale on 20.5.2010. Thereafter, the Bank issued yet another sale notice dated 28.5.2010 by fixing the reserve price at Rs. 23 lakhs in respect of the secured asset of the petitioner which was given as security. The sale could not be held on the fixed date for want of bidders. Hence, the Bank sent the communication dated 27.7.2010 to the petitioner, which reads as follows:-