AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
8 paragraphs · 220 wordsManoj Kumar Tiwari, J
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner took a housing loan of Rs. 7,00,000/- from Canara Bank, Bazpur Branch, District Udham Singh Nagar in the year 2014.
Since there has been a default in repayment of the loan, therefore, the respondent-bank has invoked its power under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 for recovery of the outstanding amount. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that business of the petitioner remained closed during lockdown, which has resulted in default on his part in repayment of the loan. He submits that petitioner is ready and willing to repay the loan; but, he needs some time for arranging the necessary funds.
In view of the peculiar facts of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to make representation to the Competent Authority in the bank. If he makes such representation within 48 hours, the Competent Authority shall consider the same and take appropriate decision, in accordance with law, within ten days thereafter.
Till decision on petitioner's representation, proceedings for auction sale may go on, however, the sale shall not be confirmed.
Let a certified copy of this order be issued today itself.