SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(MP) 935

A.K.GOHIL
Siddh Industries, Indore – Appellant
Versus
Union Bank of India – Respondent


Advocates:
Vijay Asudani for petitioners; N.N. Jain for respondents.

ORDER

1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India petitioners have challenged demand notice dated 27 .11.2002 (Annexure P-5) issued by respondent No.1 under the provisions of section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for brevity "the Act of 2002") and thereafter followed by notices for taking possession of the assets dated 3.3.2003; 10.3.2003 and 21.4.2003 (Annexures "P-7", "P-8" and "P-9").

2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner No. 1 is a proprietorship firm who was granted total financial assistance of Rs. 143.00 lacs by respondent Bank on 10.4.2000 under the heads of C.C. (RYP) Rs. 100.00 lacs; Term Loan for Machinery Rs. 25.50 lacs; and Term Loan for Building Rs. 17.50 lacs. Petitioners No.2 to 4 are guarantors to the said loan. Petitioners have deposited title deeds of properties situated at Flat No. 104, Chandramani Apartment, Janki Nagar, Indore; Open Plot Survey Nos. 370,371 and 372 (12,0000 sq.ft.) at village Musakhedi, P.B. No. 26, Nemawar Road, Indore; Plot Survey Nos. 369 & 370 at Village Mysakhedi, P.R. No. 26, Nemawar Road, Indore; Factory Land and Building at Surv





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top