MANOJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sandeep Singh, learned counsel for the respondent bank.

(2.) Petitioner is a borrower from the respondent bank. When the petitioner failed to repay the loan amount even after notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, notice under Rule 8(1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 has been issued. Notice records that the petitioner is under a liability to repay a sum of Rs. 1,63,691/- on 10. 8. 2017. At this stage, petitioner has approached this Court challenging the said notice.

(3.) Admittedly, demand notice under Section 13(2) of the Act has not been challenged by the petitioner and directly possession notice has been challenged.