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

2021 Supreme(Telangana) 103

A.RAJASEKHAR REDDY, T.VINOD KUMAR
Kailash Chand Gupta – Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Chandrasen Law Offices.
For the Respondents:A. Krishnam Raju, Advocate.

ORDER :

T. Vinod Kumar, J.

1. This writ petition is filed assailing the action of the respondent bank in issuing demand notice dated 23.01.2020 under Section 13(2) and possession notice dated 24.09.2020 under Section 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, 'the SARFAESI Act'), as being illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and contrary to the provisions of the SARFAESI Act and the Rules made thereunder.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri A. Krishnam Raju, learned counsel appearing for the respondent bank.

3. It is contended that the 5th petitioner is in the business of buying, selling and manufacture of gold jewelry, and had availed credit facility in the form of financial assistance and other facilities from the respondent bank. Initially the credit facility was availed by the 5th petitioner in the year 2008 in a sum of Rs. 35 crores and having regard to the regularity in repayment, the respondent bank enhanced the said financial facility over a period of time by periodical renewal and stood at Rs. 80 Crore as on 01.03.2018. In respect of such financial faci

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