The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:
“i) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to invoke the Securitization proceedings in Ext.P1 property for recovery of the amount due under Ext.P2 within stipulated time limits and to desist from the employing any other mode of recovery, including recovery from the salary of the petitioner in the interest of justice.
AND ii) To pass any such or further orders as the petitioner may seek and this Hon'ble Court deem fit to grant.”
2. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits on instructions that, no steps have been taken so far by the Bank, invoking the machinery under the SARFAESI Act. It is also stated that, the apprehension of the petitioner that the Bank may proceed against the petitioner, for recovering the salary instead of proceeding against the secured assets, is wrong and misconceived.
After hearing both the sides, the writ petition is disposed of, without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the respondent W.P.(C) No.29811 of 2014 2 Bank to proceed against the secured assets, in accordance with law, if there occurs any default on the part of the petitioner.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp