- (1.) The petitioner in this WP under Article 226 dated November 16, 2011 is seeking the following principal relief: "a) A Writ of or in the nature of Mandamus do issue commanding the respondent authorities to send the dispute between petitioner and ICICI Bank Limited Respondent No. 1 to the Learned Lok Adalat at the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta forthwith." The petitioner took a home loan from ICICI Bank Limited, a private bank and as such not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. Since he was in default on the loan, proceedings have been initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The authorised officer took measures under section 13(4) of the Act issuing a possession notice dated August 2011.
(2.) Stating his "financial hardships" the petitioner sent a lawyer's notice seeking time to repay the loan. Now he has filed this WP alleging that his case has not been considered fairly and reasonably, and asserting that this Court has jurisdiction to transfer the case to the Lok Adalat, organised for the High Court at Calcutta, for amicable settlement under section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that in view of the provisions of section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 the petitioner is entitled to file this WP seeking a mandamus commanding the respondents to refer the disputes to a Lok Aualat for amicable settlement.;