CWP No.3337 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.3337 of 2010 Date of Decision: 12.07.2010 **** Priti Sharma . . . . Petitioner VS. Union of India and others . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. CS Pasricha, Advocate for respondents No.2 & 3 ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner seeks quashing of the notice dated 05.02.2010 (Annexure P6), issued by the respondent-Bank under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The aforesaid action has been initiated on account of non-payment of the house loan by the petitioner. (2). Upon notice of motion, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank informs that as on 09.07.2010, a sum of Rs.4,09,906/- is recoverable from the petitioner. (3). Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, states that he is willing to pay the entire dues within CWP No.3337 of 2010.doc - 2 – a period of six months. He further states that the petitioner shall keep on paying the monthly instalment of not less than Rs.50000/- to ensure that the entire loan is paid within the above stated period. (4). The said offer made by the petitioner is acceptable to the counsel for the respondent-Bank. (5). In this view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the impugned action shall remain in abeyance for a period of six months to enable the petitioner to discharge her entire loan liability along with due interest within the stipulated period. (6). Ordered accordingly. (7). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 12.07.2010 vishal shonkar