ANOOP KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondent no.1 and Sri Mahesh Mehrotra, learned counsel appearing for the Bank-respondents no.2 and? 3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being? finally disposed of. By means of this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for quashing? the? possession notice? dated 30.7.2012 issued by respondent no.3? under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act (in short the Act) and Rule 8(1) framed under the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002? (in short the Rules). The petitioners had taken cash credit limit? of Rs. 12,00,000.00 for which the security of his house, i.e., immovable property was given. The petitioners have also given a bank guarantee? of Rs. 10,00,000.00.

(2.) THE Bank, invoking power? under Section 13(2) of the Act? had issued notice? to the petitioners for the recovery of an amount of Rs. 23,03,887.50 along with interest.?? The notice under Section 13(2) of the Act contains? the recovery against both, i.e., cash credit limit as well as bank guarantee. The Bank invoking its power? under Section 13(4) of the Act has now issued possession notice? with regard to the house in question? on 13.7.2012 in which the amount demanded? from the petitioners has been mentioned as sum of Rs. 13,74,471.10 as on 31st November, 2011.? Learned counsel for the petitioners have come up in the writ petition against the possession notice and submitted? that the? petitioners accept the entire liability as mentioned in the possession notice? and are ready to deposit the entire amount provided some reasonable time is given to them to deposit the amount.