JUDGMENT : The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by recovery steps initiated by the respondent bank against a property that was offered as security for a loan availed by the petitioner's father. In the writ petition, the case of the petitioner is essentially that after the death of his father, the respondents had continued with the proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstructions of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, hereinafter referred to as 'the SARFAESI Act', without issuing a fresh notice under Section 13(2) to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the respondent bank would submit that in proceedings that were initiated when the father was alive, the petitioner's father as also the mother and other siblings of the petitioner were put on notice, and the proceedings initiated before the Debts Recovery Tribunal was only after giving notice to them. It is stated that a notice was issued to the said siblings and mother of the petitioner even at the stage, when the Magistrate was approached under Section 14. Pursuant to an earlier direction from this Court in Ext.P2 judgment, the respondents had also issued a notice to the petitioner at the stage of proceedings before the Magistrate. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent bank. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition, leaving it open to the respondent bank to proceed against the rights possessed by the other legal heirs of the deceased borrower in the property in question. Inasmuch as a fresh notice under Section 13(2) has not been issued to the petitioner in the writ petition, and the petitioner is also a legal heir of the deceased borrower, I make it clear that, proceedings against the petitioner's share in the property shall be initiated only after issuing a notice under Section 13(2) to the petitioner.