DURGA BHAVANI AGRO TECH INDUSTRY Vs. CANARA BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by one portion of an order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, where the Tribunal allowed the application for amendment, but directed the payment of additional Court fee, the borrower/applicant before the Tribunal has come up with the above writ petition.

(2.) Heard Smt.P.K. kalyani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Dhishit Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the Bank.

(3.) The petitioner availed two loans from the respondent Bank in March, 2010. On the ground that the account became a non-performing asset, a demand notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, was issued on 16.05.2011. It was followed by a possession notice dated 16.07.2011. Challenging the possession notice, the petitioner filed S.A. No.213/2011 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Thereafter, the possession notice was re-issued on 06.11.2014.