Smt.Geetha Rani v. The Authorized Officer, GIC Housing Finance Limited, 6th Floor, UTI Towers, Basheerbagh & Ors.
Case at a glance
- Order date
- 25 Jan 2008
- Bench
- N V RAMANA
Outcome
Disposed of
With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Judgment
Smt. Geetha Rani AND The Authorized Officer, GIC Housing Finance Limited, 6th Floor, UTI Towers, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad and others. .... PETITIONER .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO. 1665 of 2007 Order: In this writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ( for short ‘the SARFAESI Act’) dated 4.12.2006 and the further notice sent by the 2nd respondent dated 15.12.2006. While admitting the writ petition on 1.2.2007, this Court directed the 2nd respondent not to initiate any further proceedings under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act till 4.2.2007. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that in view of the interim orders, no action has been initiated against the petitioner so far. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner is suffering from ill health and, therefore, sought a direction from this Court to the respondents to settle the loan amount under one time settlement scheme. Admittedly, the petitioner obtained loan from the respondents for construction of a house and failed to repay the same and, therefore, the respondents initiated proceedings under the SARFAESI Act,
Operative part
2002. The petitioner wants to settle the loan under one time settlement scheme. Since the dispute is between the respondent and the petitioner with regard to the settlement of the amounts due to the bank, this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot issue a direction to the respondents to settle the loan amount under one time settlement scheme and it is for the respondents to take a decision on the said issue. Though this Court granted interim orders till 4.2.2007 only, it is stated that the respondents have not taken any action pursuant to the impugned notices so far. If the petitioner intends to settle the issue, she is at liberty to make a representation to the respondents who may consider and dispose of the same accordance with law. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date: 25.1.2008
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; SARFAESI Act, 2002; Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 25 Jan 2008. The bench was N V RAMANA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.