THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH W.P.No.2722 of 2010 ORDER: (Per Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed, J) This writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents-Bank in conducting auction of the petitioner’s residential house bearing Flat No.205, 2nd Floor, Kanchan Residency, Chinthal, Qutubullapur, Hyderabad, pursuant to the auction notice, dated 19.01.2010, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner obtained loan for an amount of Rs.8,00,000/-from the first respondent Bank, for purchase of the house flat bearing No.205, 2nd floor, Kanchan Residency, Chintal, Quthbullapur, Hyderabad, payable with 6% simple interest in equal monthly installments. The petitioner states that he discharged an amount of Rs.1,58,200/-on different occasions till 12.04.2008 and subsequently, failed to repay the same as he incurred huge loss in his business. While so, the second respondent issued notice under Section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the Act’), without issuing the demand notice under Section 13(2) of the Act. Though the petitioner requested the respondents to grant time for repayment of the loan amount, they issued auction notice, dated 19.01.2010, for sale of his house. Hence, he filed the present writ petition. 3. The first respondent-Bank filed counter-affidavit stating that notice under Section 13(2) of the Act was issued to the petitioner on 03.08.2009 and the same was duly acknowledged by him on 08.08.2009 and that since there was no reply from the petitioner, the Bank issued possession notice under Section 13(4) of the Act on 01.12.2009, for which also there was no reply, and therefore, it proceeded further by issuing auction notice, dated 19.01.2010, fixing the date of auction as 23.02.2010. 4. This Court, on 10.02.2010, while issuing notice before admission granted interim stay on condition of the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lakhs only) to the credit of the loan account within four weeks from that date, failing which, the first respondent-Bank is at liberty to finalize the sealed offers so received, but the petitioner has not complied with the said order till today. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-Bank. 6. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has paid an amount of Rs.1,58,200/- towards the loan amount and that because of the financial problems and the hospitalization of his children, he has not complied with the interim order passed by this Court in time and that if the time is granted to him, he would discharge the entire loan amount, for which the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents-Bank stated no objection. 7. Recording the above and so as to give an opportunity to the petitioner for discharge of the loan amount, we deem it appropriate to direct the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-(Rupees three lakhs only) to the credit of the loan account within a period of three weeks from today and the outstanding balance amount to the satisfaction of the first respondent Bank, within a period of two months thereafter. 8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _________________ G. CHANDRAIAH, J Date:16.06.2010 Note: Issue CC by three days. (Bo) sj