CWP-19983-202 IN Suman Sharma State Bank of In Wh pro CORAM: HO HO Present: M Mr Mr and for SHEEL NAGU 1. Th this Court unde the widow (peti sanctioned loan Hyderabad, whi 2. Th 2016, whereafte the late husband to write a reque 2022 (O&M ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN AT CHANDIGA CW arma Versus k of India and others Re Pr Up Whether only operative part of the judgm pronounced or the full judgment is pron HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJ ***** Mr. Puneet Sharma, Advocate, for Mr. Akshay Jain, Advocate, for res Mr. Rajneesh Malhotra, Advocate, and Ms. Manvi Verma, Advocate, for respondent No.3-SBI Life. ***** AGU, C.J. This petition invoking the writ as w t under Article 226/227 of the Consti (petitioner), who along with her late d loan of Rs.7.00 Lakhs in 2003, init d, which got merged in the State Bank The late husband of the petition ereafter the payment of EMIs becam usband of the petitioner suffered a fal request letter dated 05.10.2020 (Anne - 1- F PUNJAB & HARYANA DIGARH CWP-19983-2022 (O&M) ....Petitioner ...Respondents Reserved on: 04.12.2025 Pronounced on: 08.01.2026 Uploaded on: 08.01.2026 judgment is pronouned: operative part/full judgmen SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY te, for the petitioner. for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. ocate, ocate, rit as well as supervisory jurisdiction o Constitution of India has been filed late husband Sh. Rakesh Kumar, wa 3, initially by the State Bank of India e Bank of India on 01.04.2017. etitioner suffered acute depression i became irregular. Thereafter, in 2019 d a fall. This compelled the petitione (Annexure P-4) to the respondent Nos gment ction of filed by ar, was f India, sion in n 2019, titioner nt Nos. AJAY PRASHER 2026.01.08 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-19983-202 1 and 2 that sinc Housing Loan C account was dec Rs.3,85,754.12 Securitization a Security Intere Annexure P-5. revealed the ph husband. Respo ground that the reasons of illnes 2.1. Th 13 (4) of the (Annexure P-17 2.2. Me 14) informing t years i.e. from the claim of insu 3. Th aforesaid order 26.07.2022 (An (Annexure P-10 4. Re taken a stand th term of the po 2022 (O&M ) at since the loan account is insured un Loan Coverage, the protective cover as declared Non Performing Asset (N 54.12 as on 17.11.2022, in respect tion and Reconstruction of Financi Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SAR 5. In response u/s 13 (3) (A) of the physical and mental infirmity Respondent No.2-Bank declined to e at the same is available only in case o f illness. Thereafter, the respondent/Bank f the SARFAESI Act by issuing p 17). Meanwhile, the bank issued letter ming that SBI Life Master Policy sec from 29.09.2004 to 29.09.2018 and s of insurance is declined. Thus, the petitioner has approa order dated 07.03.2022 (Annexure P 2 (Annexure P-17) issued u/s 13 (4 10) of SARFAESI Act. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2-Bank, b tand that husband of the petitioner exp the policy expired on 29.09.2018 (p - 2- red under the SBI Life-Super Suraksh cover be provided. However, the loa set (NPA) showing outstanding dues o spect of which, notice u/s 13 (2) o inancial Assets and Enforcement o ‘SARFAESI Act’) was issued vid (A) of SARFAESI Act, the petitione by citing health reasons of he ed to extend the insurance cover on th case of death of the insured and not fo took recourse by invoking Sectio ing possession notice on 26.07.202 letter dated 07.03.2022 (Annexure P cy secured the loan in question for 1 and since the policy has now expired approached this Court assailing th ure P-14) and possession notice date 13 (4) along with notice u/s 13 (2 ank, by filing a reply, have primaril er expired on 12.12.2021 and since th 18 (prior to the death of petitioner’ uraksha he loan dues of (2) of ent of d vide titioner of her r on the not for Section 7.2022 xure P- for 15 xpired, ing the e dated 13 (2) rimarily ince the tioner’s AJAY PRASHER 2026.01.08 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-19983-202 husband), no be 4.1. Ho better explained 4.2. Wh facts, was that 29.09.2018 and 2021, responden Policy of Home 5. Ho are not very cl present dispute, entitled to the b not? 6. Th had stayed disp asset). The said 7. Wh the service to b decided by the ought not to be especially when 8. In passed by this C the jurisdiction case may be. If 2022 (O&M ) , no benefit can accrue to the petitioner However, the Bank (respondent N lained by respondent No.3-Insurance C Whereas, the stand of responden s that the insurance cover was only 8 and since the insurance cover did no pondent No.3 is not liable. Responde Home Loan Insurance with the written However, the terms and conditions ery clear and explicit so as to facili ispute, as to whether the petitioner an o the benefit of the insurance cover, This Court, while taking cognizan d dispossession of the petitioner from he said interim order is continuing till d Whether the insurance company- ce to be rendered by it to the petitio by the appropriate and jurisdictional t to be dealt with while exercising th when the process of adjudication invo In view of above, this Court, wh this Court on 18.01.2023, extends lib iction District Consumer Forum or th be. If, the jurisdictional District/State - 3- itioner out of the insurance policy. ent Nos.1 and 2) left this aspect to b rance Company. ondent No.3-Insurance Company, o only for 15 years, which expired o did not exist on the date of death i.e. i spondent No.3 has annexed the Maste written statement. ditions mentioned in the Master Polic facilitate this Court to adjudicate th ner and co-borrower (her husband) ar over, which expired on 29.09.2018 o gnizance of this matter on 18.01.2023 r from the mortgaged property (secure g till date. -respondent No.3 was deficient i petitioner or not, is a question to b ctional District Consumer Forum an ing the writ jurisdiction by this Cour on involve disputed questions of fact. rt, while continuing the interim orde nds liberty to the petitioner to approac or the State Consumer Forum, as th t/State Consumer Forum is approache ct to be , on ired on i.e. in Master r Policy ate the nd) are 2018 or 1.2023, secured cient in n to be m and Court, fact. order pproach , as the roached AJAY PRASHER 2026.01.08 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-19983-202 within a period shall be enterta on limitation alo 8.1. It i jurisdictional Nos. 1 and 2- loan. 8.2. In Consumer Foru order passed by of the complain 8.3. Th merits of the cla 8.4. Wi disposes of this 08.01.2026 Ajay Prasher Whether sp Whether re 2022 (O&M ) period of 60 days from today, then the ntertained and disposed of on its own ion alone. It is made clear that in case, the District/State Consumer Forum -Bank shall be free to liquidate th In case, the complaint is filed befo r Forum by the petitioner within 60 d sed by this Court on 18.01.2023 shall plaint. This Court hastens to add that we the claim of petitioner. With the aforesaid observations, d of this petition. (SH CH (SA ther speaking/reasoned : Ye ther reportable : Ye - 4- en the said complaint of the petitione its own merits without being dismisse the petitioner does not approach th orum within 60 days, then responden idate the secured asset and recover th d before the jurisdictional District/Stat n 60 days from today, then the interim 3 shall continue to operate till disposa we have not rendered any finding o ions, directions and liberty, this Cou (SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE Yes / No Yes / No titioner smissed ach the pondent ver the ct/State interim isposal ding on s Court AJAY PRASHER 2026.01.08 14:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document