SAI RISHIK INTERIORS Vs. CANARA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Karumanchi Indraneel Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri G.V.S.Kishore Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

(3.) Though various grounds are raised in the writ petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to a notice, dtd. 1/6/2021, issued under Sec. 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (for short, "SARFAESI Act"), the petitioner has submitted representations on 28/7/2021 and 13/9/2021. According to him, in spite of receipt of the said representations, there is no response from the respondent bank, which is in violation of Sec. 13(3A) of the SARFAESI Act.