TEJAS RANABHAI DER Vs. IDFC FIRST BANK LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :-

(2.) Learned advocate Mr. Shivang Mehta appearing for the petitioner draws attention of this Court to a notice produced at page 89 and points out that the aforesaid notice dtd. 15/10/2019 issued by the Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate, Adajan, Surat city is a consequential notice based on an order dtd. 22/3/2019 passed by the District Magistrate, Surat upon an application preferred under Sec. 14 of the SARFAESI Act by the respondent No.1 Bank.

(3.) Learned advocate Ms. Shivani Rajpurohit, learned advocate appearing for respondent No.1 - Bank states that the aforesaid notice dtd. 15/10/2019 is based upon an order dtd. 22/3/2019 passed by the District Magistrate, Surat upon an application preferred under Sec. 14 of the SARFAESI Act by the respondent No.1 Bank and the petitioner has till date not challenged the order dtd. 22/3/2019. She further states that the respondent Bank had issued only three notices and out of the said notices, first notice was issued on 29/4/2017, second notice was issued on 3/8/2019 and third notice was issued on 28/2/2020. However, as the notice dtd. 3/8/2019 issued by the respondent No.1 Bank was withdrawn by the Bank vide order dtd. 28/2/2020 and after withdrawing the said notice, the respondent No.1 Bank had issued another notice dtd. 28/2/2020, the petitioner can challenge the same by initiating appropriate proceedings. She would further submit that at this stage, the petitioner would not be in a position to challenge even the subsequent notice for the reason that the possession of the property has already been taken over by the respondent No.1 Bank.