ORDER

Dinesh Mehta, J. - Mr. Thanvi, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was regularly depositing the loan installment. In the meantime, on account of general financial constraints arising out of spread of COVID-19, the petitioner was unable to honour his financial commitments.

2. This Court is not oblivious of its limitation of interference in the matters relating to action taken under the provisions of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the ’SARFAESI Act’) in light of catena of judgments of Hon’ble the Supreme Court, however, considering that the petitioner has approached this Court with bonafide intention to settle the dues, this Court is inclined to exercise its writ jurisdiction.

3. Learned counsel submits that petitioner is genuinely desirous of squaring off the loan account and settle the bank’s dues and if the respondents - Bank seizes residential house of the petitioners, the same will affect petitioner’s family.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that out of the total dues of Rs.60,71,502/-, as mentioned in the respondent - Bank