THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU W.P.No.18010 OF 2009 BETWEEN: Mrs. K. Deepa, W/o. K. Pramod Reddy, R/o. H.No.1-6/59, Plot No.59, Amar Cooperative Society, Kaviri Hills, Guttala Begumpet, Madapur, Hyderabad. PETITIONER And Punjab & Sind Bank Rep. By its Authorised Officer, Zonal Office, Spencer Tower, First Floor, 770-A, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002 and Branch at First Floor, Panchasheel Towers, M.G.Road Secunderabad, rep by Sr. Manager. RESPONDENT Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. M. Govind Reddy Counsel for the respondent: Sri Deepak Bhattacharjee The Court made the following – ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) The petitioner, who borrowed an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- for the purpose of raising housing loan of Rs.15,00,000/- and Rs.7,50,000/- for the purpose of securing over draft facility, on 23.08.2003 and 18.11.2003 respectively, was served with a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconciliation of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SRFAESI Act’) by the respondent-Bank demanding to repay the entire outstanding amount of Rs.21,48,687/-. Questioning the said notice, the present writ petition is filed contending that a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- has already been deposited on 22.08.2009 and unless the asset has been declared as non-performing asset or it has become substandard or doubtful, issuance of notice under Section 13(2) of the SRFAESI Act is not at all called for and the same is liable to be set aside. The respondent-Bank filed a counter opposing the writ petition stating that on issuance of notice under Section 13(2) of the SRFAESI Act, the petitioner has a right to raise objections, and the bank has to consider the said objections under Section 13(3) (A) of the SRFAESI Act. Without availing the said remedy she cannot invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Admittedly, the petitioner has not raised any objection to the notice issued, nor filed any representation stating that the asset cannot be declared as non-performing asset or it has become substandard or doubtful. Further, it was represented that pursuant to staying of all further proceedings against the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the SRFAESI Act, on 27.08.2009, the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to discharge the loan. Therefore, it cannot be declared as non-performing asset. Since the petitioner has a remedy by way of raising objections against the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the SRFAESI Act, within a period of 60 days, and the bank now stated that possession notice under Section 13(4) of the SRFAESI Act was issued on 27.08.2009, and symbolic possession of the mortgaged property has also been taken, we deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to file her objections to the notice issued under Section 13(2) of the SRFAESI Act, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On making such representation, the Bank shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, and only thereafter, they can initiate further proceedings including the publication of possession notice under Section 13(4) of the SRFAESI Act etc. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ (A. GOPAL REDDY, J.) __________________________ (SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J.) 3rd November, 2009 Js.