IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 1074 of 2010. Decided on: May 25, 2010 Manohar Lal Sharma ….. Petitioner. Versus State Bank of India …… Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. For the Petitioner : Mr. Lalit Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral) The essential dispute in this Writ Petition pertains to the settlement of loan availed by the petitioner from the respondent Bank. The main contention of the petitioner is that he may be released part of the security so that he would be in a position to liquidate the entire dues to the Bank. 2. According to the learned counsel for the Bank, if part of the security that is now sought by the petitioner is released, namely, document pertaining to Plot No.140, the remaining security may not be sufficient to cover the liability. Since it is ultimately for the Bank to decide as to how best to secure their assets this Court will not be 2 justified in issuing any direction to the Bank to release the part of the security so long the Bank is of the view that remaining security is insufficient to cover the loan liability. 3. Faced with such a situation, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has deposited an amount of Rs.50,000/- today and the total liability as on today is around Rs. seventeen lacs. It is submitted that if two months’ time is given, that is, up to 15th July, 2010, the petitioner will be in a position to liquidate the entire liability even without releasing the security. 4. Having regard to the entire actual background of the case and particularly in view of the fact that the loan is fully security with valuable assets and in view of the fact that request of the petitioner is only for time for another six weeks, we are of the considered view that it is just, fit, fair, proper and reasonable that a chance is given to the petitioner to clear the liability as presently planned by him. 5. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of as follows. (i). Undertaking of the petitioner that he will clear the entire liability on or before 15th July, 2010, the liability on that date, is recorded. (ii) In case the petitioner does not liquidate the liability as above on or before 15th July, 2010, it will be open to the Bank to proceed against the secured assets. (iii) We make it clear that it will be open to the Bank to fix the schedule for the recovery of the loan by sale of the property fixing it to take place on 17th July, 2010 so that in the unlikely event of the 3 petitioner not clearing the liability as on 15th July, 2010 the Bank will be in a position to realize the same in the auction scheduled to be held on 17th July, 2010. Needless to say that till 15th July, 2010 there shall be no coercive steps except of proceedings for sale by way of notice etc. 6. To the extent required, order 17th May, 2010 will stand modified in terms of the judgment as above. 7. All miscellaneous applications are also disposed of. Dasti copy on usual terms. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice May 25 2010 (Justice Surinder Singh), (rks) Judge.