PNP 1 WP6147-3.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6147 OF 2011 Daniel Frank Rosario ..Petitioner. versus Union of India and others ..Respondents. ..... Ms. Nikita R. Sawant i/b Mr. Sanjay Kshirsagar for the Petitioner. Mr. Abhishek Khare with Ms. Pankhari B. i/b Khare Legal Chambers for Respondent No.3. ...... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & A. A. SAYED, JJ. 3 October 2011. P.C. : 1. The Petitioner in these proceedings has sought a direction to the Second Respondent, the State Bank of India, to consider a proposal for a one time settlement of a loan account. The Petitioners have also questioned the legality of a notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. 2. An affidavit in reply has been filed in these proceedings by the Second respondent in which it has been stated that the scheme for one time settlement has no application under the circulars framed by the Reserve Bank of India since the loan in the present case was a housing loan. The Second Respondent has also issued notice under Section 13(4). The bank has also annexed copies of letters written by PNP 2 WP6147-3.10.sxw the borrower at Exhibits C-1, C-2 and C-3 of the reply representing that the dues would be cleared in the manner indicated therein. 3. We do not consider it necessary or appropriate to entertain this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution since the Petitioner, in the event of the bank taking a measure under Section 13(4), has recourse to the remedy of an appeal under Section 17 to the Tribunal. In the affidavit in reply the bank has relied upon a statement of account which shows that an amount of Rs.4,03,036/- is due and payable by the Petitioner. Counsel appearing on behalf of the bank states on instructions that the bank is willing to give a concession in the amount payable, such that in the event the Petitioner pays an amount of Rs.3,60,000/- within a period of four weeks from today, the bank will conclude the entire transaction at the aforesaid amount in full and final settlement. In view of the aforesaid statement, we issue a direction to the effect that for a period of four weeks from today, the bank shall not take possession of the secured asset. Within this period it would be open to the Petitioner to pay the amount in terms of the offer made by the bank before the Court. In the event that the Petitioner fails to do so, the bank will be at liberty to take further steps in accordance with law for the recovery of the entire amount of its dues. The Petition is accordingly disposed of. (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) (A. A. Sayed, J.)