IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 1368 of 2009. Date of Decision: 27th May, 2009. M/s Sharma Communications Petitioner through Mr. O.P.Kamboj, Advocate Versus State Bank of India & Ors. Respondents through Mr. A.K.Khunger, Advocate. 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? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL) This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 1368 and 1467 of 2009 as common questions of law and facts are involved in both the cases. The petitioner seeks quashing of the proceedings initiated vide notice dated 24.11.2008 [Annexure P-2] issued under Section 13 of the Securitization & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioners in both the cases are common, who have taken two separate loans from the respondent Bank and have mortgaged separate properties as 'secured assets'. Their failure to repay the loan has led to issuance of the impugned notice under Section 13 of the Act. The petitioners submitted their objections followed by a legal notice but the Bank still proceeded with the proposed auction of the mortgaged property. Hence the petitioners have approached this Court. Since the petitioners took the plea that they are ready and willing to repay the entire loan, if permitted to dispose of one of the mortgaged property, status-quo regarding sale of the mortgaged properties was ordered to be maintained by this Court vide order dated 29.1.2009. Learned counsel urges that if the petitioners are permitted to dispose of one of the mortgaged property and granted reasonable time to find out a prospective buyer, the entire loan amount shall stand paid and the other mortgaged property of the petitioners shall also be saved. The offer appears to be reasonable, to which learned counsel for the respondent Bank has also no objection. Considering the totality of circumstances and the offer made by learned counsel for the petitioners, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction that the petitioners, if so advised, may find out a prospective buyer and enter into a tripartite agreement, to which the respondent Bank shall also be a party. The prospective buyer shall be liable to pay the sale proceeds to the extent of loan liability directly to the Bank. On payment thereof, the respondent Bank shall issue No Dues Certificate so as to enable them to execute a sale deed in favour of the prospective buyer. The needful shall be done within a period of three months. If the petitioner fails to bring any prospective buyer and/or discharge the loan liability, the respondent Bank shall be at liberty to proceed against them under the Act, in accordance with law. Disposed of. Dasti. May 27, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE