IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.6273 of 2008 Between: 1 J. Ramachandra Rao, S/o. Sri J.V.S.S.N. Murthy, R/o. H.No. 1-1/7, New Teacher's Colony, Nagulapalli (Post), Anakapalli Taluk, Visakhapatnam District. 2 Smt. J. Saraswathi Devi, W/o. Sri J.V.S.S.N. Murthy, R/o. H.No. 1-1/7, New Teacher's Colony, Nagulapalli (Post), Anakapalli Taluk, Visakhapatnam District. 3 K. Tulasi Prasanna, Sri J.S. Ramachandra Rao, R/o. H.No. 1-1/7, New Teacher's Colony, Nagulapalli (Post), Anakapalli Taluk, Visakhapatnam District. ..... PETITIONERS AND Bank of India, Anakaplli Branch, Visakhapatnam District, Rep. by its Chief Manager & Authorized Officer, Visakhapatnam Zone. .....RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, declaring the action f the Respondent Bank in publishing Tender Cum Auction Notice Dt. 22-2-2008 published in Eenadu Newspaper Visakhapatnam District Edition Dt. 23-2-2008 for sale of the property of the Petitioners contrary to the procedure contemplated under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interests Act 2002 and following the procedure stipulated under Security Interest (Enforcement ) Rules 2002, as illegal, arbitrary, malafide and without jurisdiction and pass Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.C.RAGHU Counsel for the Respondent: N.A. The Court made the following : ORDER: It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the total liability of instalments due so far by the petitioners is to the order of Rs.2,64,000/- and without recalling the entire loan amount, the respondent bank is proceeding with the proposed sale of the mortgaged property. This, according to the learned counsel, is contrary to the scheme contained under Section 13 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and therefore he disputes the validity of the notice of auction got published by the respondent bank on 23.02.2008. To establish the bonafides, the petitioners want to deposit the entire outstanding liability of Rs.2,64,000/- on or before 05.05.2008 to the loan account maintained with the respondent bank. They also propose to take up the issue of regularizing the account with the respondent bank. It is for the respondent bank to consider and pass appropriate orders with regard to the regularization of the loan account, provided the petitioners establish their bonafide by liquidating the entire amount of instalments due till then. The bank is also interested in recovering the outstanding liability and it is primarily intending to secure its interest. Perhaps the balance can be struck by directing the petitioners to deposit the entire outstanding liability of Rs.2,64,000/- (Rupees two lakh sixty four thousand only) on or before 05.05.2008 and to submit the proposals to the respondent bank for regularization of the account. If the petitioners commit any default in paying the sum of Rs.2,64,000/- on or before 05.05.2008 or submit the proposals to the respondent bank to have their loan account regularized to the satisfaction of the respondent bank, it will be open to the respondent bank to proceed further with the auction notice published on 23.02.2008 from the stage where it had stopped. If the petitioners deposit the entire amount as directed above, and also seek regularization of their loan account, no further action pursuant to the auction notice shall be initiated. With this, the writ petition stands disposed of at the admission stage. No costs. ______________________________ NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J Date: 25.03.2008 va