- (1.) We have heard Sri Pankaj Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Satish Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for the State Bank Of India, Meerut-respondent no.4.
(2.) The petitioner is a borrower and had taken certain cash credit facility from the respondent-bank. Since the petitioner could not repay the loan, proceedings under The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred as the 'Act') was initiated by the respondent-bank. A notice dated 11.05.2013 under Section-13(2) of the Act was issued to the petitioner in pursuance of which the petitioner filed his objection dated 05.07.2013. Without deciding the objection, it transpires that the respondent-bank filed an application under Section-14 of the Act before the District Magistrate which was allowed by an order dated 28.11.2014 permitting the respondent-bank to take physical possession of the property in question. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the action of the respondent and the order of the Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue) has filed the present writ petition contending that no measures for taking possession of the property could be taken unless objection of the petitioner was decided by the respondent-bank under Section-13(3-A) of the Act which, in the instant case, has not been done.
(3.) This Court while entertaining the writ petition had directed the learned counsel for the respondent-bank to seek necessary instructions as to whether any objection was filed and whether any order on such objection was passed by the respondent-bank.;