V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J.

1. Challenging the order passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘Act’), the borrower and guarantors have come up with the above Writ Petition.

2. Heard Mr. Vedula Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners.

3. Admittedly, the 1st petitioner company was granted credit facilities by the 1st respondent bank to the tune of nearly Rs.20.00 Crores. The credit facilities were secured by the factory building as well as other immovable properties. The petitioner Nos.2 and 3 herein stood as guarantors for the due repayment of the loan.

4. Due to the defaults committed by the petitioners, the account was classified as a Non-Performing Asset on 30.06.2017.

5. Thereafter, a demand notice dated 01.07.2017 was issued under Section 13 (2) of the Act. Since the petitioners failed to respond to the demand notice, a possession notice dated 14.11.2018 was issued under Section 13 (4) of the Act.

6. It appears that the petitioners responded to the possession notice by offering a One-Time Settlement (OTS) through their letter, dated 07.