NAVIN KISHORE SAHAY Vs. ALLAHABAD BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Deepak Roshan, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner referred to Clause-8 of the Tripartite Agreement entered into between him, (Flat owner), the bank and the builder, which reads as follows:

(2.) He submitted that only lien was created which is exempted under Section 31 of the SARFAESI Act. He further submitted that installment amount has been deducted from the salary of the Petitioner by his employer-Cognex Pharma Ltd., from the month of April 2007 to February, 2010, which will appear from his pay slips but the bank has not updated the Pass-Book, which could support the said contention that installment were paid by the Petitioner through his employer.

(3.) On the other hand. Mr. R.R. Nath, learned Counsel appearing for the bank, submitted that the employer of the Petitioner has not deposited the installments with the bank and the bank can supply the statement of accounts to the Petitioner in support of such contention. He also referred to Section 2 (zf) of SARFAESI Act, which reads as follows: