17. The learned Single Judge, further referring to authoritative
pronouncement in Haryana Financial Corporation Vs. Jagadamba Oil Mills
[(2002) 3 SCC 496] held that there is nothing reflected in the affidavit filed in
support of this writ petition by which this court could interfere with the impugned
notice, which merely calls upon the petitioner to pay the dues, as otherwise it
would necessitate action for recovery by auction sale of the mortgaged property
that has been conferred under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act.
1951; in such circumstances, it is not possible to grant any of the reliefs as sought
in the writ petition, though it would not preclude the petitioner from seeking
redemption of the mortgage on making full payment of the debt due claimed by
the third respondent before auction sale of the mortgaged property takes place.
The learned Single Judge, by holding so, dismissed the writ petition filed by the
borrower company.