Agya Kaur Tuteja, Wd/o Shri Ram Singh Tuteja v. Union Bank oflndia, Regiond Qffice, 1st Floor Mahavir

By this petition, tiie petitioners impugp the notice dated 11-8-2008 (Annexure-P/1) issued by the Union Bank oflndia whereby it was infomied to the petitioners that ofiBeials and representatives of the Bank shall take or cause for taking possession of the secured assets wherever it may be sitoated/stored on 17-9-2008 between 11.30 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. In Ifae inyugned notice there is a reference to demand notice dated 27-5-2008 issued under Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of '^. !v °^^/ '^ ^ Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 {for Ihe Act, 2002'), calling upon the petitioners to discharge a sum of Rs.16,71,000/- with interest. The petitioners have failed to discharge liability even after expiry of60 days notice period. It appears that fhe petitfoners have not myugned the earlier notice dated 27-5-2008. The enforcement of secured mterest is covered under the provisions of Sections 13 & 17 of the Act, 2002. There is a proper safeguard and mechanism provided for redressal of grievances. This is not a ease where this Court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdictioa vmdec Aiticle 226 of the Constitution oflndia. Thus, without going into the ments of the case, interference is deelined. In view of the foregoing, ttie petition is dismissed, as not maintainable, at the admission stage itself. Consequently, I.A.Nos. 1 & 2 stand disposed of However, having regard to the facts situation of the case, as the date of taking over possession of the secured assets is on 17-9-2008, it may not be possible for the petitioners to approach any appropriate statutory forum in one day. Thus, it is expedient in the interest of justice that no eoercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners for a period of one week i.e. on or before 22Bd September, 2008.