- (1.) The petitioner in this art.226 petition dated December 22, 2010 is questioning a possession-cum-sale notice dated December 10, 2010 (at p.42) issued by the authorised officer of Canara Bank under s.13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.
(2.) Mr Basu, counsel for the petitioner, has questioned the notice on two grounds: (i) during pendency of the proceedings instituted by the bank under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 it could not initiate proceedings under the 2002 Act; and (ii) in any case, since, in view of the definition of the expression land under the unamended provisions of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, the land with respect to which the security interest was created is to be treated as an agricultural land, in view of the provisions of s.31 of the 2002 Act, it could not initiate any proceeding under this Act.
(3.) As to the remedy available under s.17 of the 2002 Act, Mr Basu has submitted that since the provisions of the Act were not applicable to the security interest with respect to which measure under s.13(4) has been taken, there is no reason for the petitioner to go to the Tribunal under s.17. Counsel for the bank has submitted that the land with respect to which the security interest was created and the bank has exercised right under s.13(4) is not an agricultural land. Her further submission is that there is no prohibition against initiating proceedings under the 2002 Act during pendency of proceedings under the 1993 Act.;