VISHAL VERMA SON OF NATHU LAL VERMA v. LAXMI INDIA FINANCE LIMITED
CW/17319/2025 · 2025-11-27
Sandeep Taneja
Public Interest Litigationbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 48438 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 48438 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:48192] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17319/2025 Vishal Verma Son Of Nathu Lal Verma, Aged About 49 Years, Resident Of Ward No. 20, Jobner Road, Phulera, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus
1. Laxmi India Finance Limited, Having Its Registered Office At 2, Dfl, Gopinath Marg, M.i. Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan- Through Its Authorised Officer.
2. Reserve Bank Of India, Having Its Central Office At 12Th And 13Th Floor, Central Office Building, Shahid Bhagat Singh Marg, Fort, Mumbai- 400 001 Through Its Chief General Manager. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kapil Kumar Kumawat (through VC) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Peush Nag with Mr. Avinash Kumbhaj HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Order 27/11/2025
1. By way of this writ petition, a challenge has been made to the notice dated 19.07.2025 issued by respondent No.1 under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The only ground raised by the petitioner at this stage is that the notice has been served upon a deceased person namely Shyamli Devi, who is a Co-borrower/Mortgagor/Guarantor and therefore, the notice is a nullity.
2. Mr. Peush Nag, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent – Bank on instructions, fairly submits that since the
[2025:RJ-JP:48192] (2 of 2) [CW-17319/2025] notice has indeed been issued in the name of a deceased person, the Bank shall withdraw this notice and will issue fresh notice to the borrower/ Mortgagor/ Guarantor including the legal representative(s) of the deceased.
3. The petitioner shall provide the details of the legal representative(s) of the deceased to the respondent – Bank within a period of one week from today.
4. In view thereof, nothing further survives for adjudication in the present writ petition.
5. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.
5. All pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(SANDEEP TANEJA),J AVINASH GULERIA /30