Heard the parties.

2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that without taking action against the principal borrower, who is running its business and hold and possess sufficient means to liquidate the Bank loan, the Respondent Bank is proceeding against the petitioner under Securitization & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ( SARFACI Act for short).

3. It appears that the principal borrower M/s Silicon India availed credit facility upto Rs. 30 lacs from the respondent-Bank, for which petitioner stood guarantor on 30.12.2006 after executing all necessary documents. As the principal borrower failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the credit facility and repay the dues, the Bank classified the accounts of the principal borrower as non performing asset (NPA for short) on 30.11.2007 and accordingly issued demand notice on 30.8.2008 under section 13(2) of the SARFACI Act simultaneously against the principal borrower as well as the petitioner. It further appears that the principal borrower hypothecated stock of computers, laptops, digital camera and its accessories and peripherals etc., whereas petitioner furnished pro