demands a sum of ₹8,59,594/-. Subsequent to the receipt of the notice under Sec. 13(2), the Appellants have paid ₹80,000/- directly to the bank. Thereafter, a further amount of ₹3,00,000/- is also paid. The notice under Sec. 13(2) is pointed out to be defective for the reason that the name and designation of the authorised officer have not been stated and neither has the notice mentioned the date of classification of the account as a non-performing asset (NPA). However, It is also pertinent to note that the Appellants have not responded or objected to the notice under Sec. 13(2) raising the aforesaid point. The objection comes only when the Appellants receive a notice of dispossession subsequent to an order under Sec. 14 of the SARFAESI Act. The possession under that notice was never taken and therefore, I do not find any prima facie case in favour of the Appellants. However, to entertain the appeal, the Appellants will first have to comply with the mandatory provisions of making a pre-deposit under Sec. 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act. Since the property has not been sold or taken possession of, the threshold amount for determining the amount to be deposited is the amount mentioned in the demand notice stated above. The Appellants have pleaded that they are only carpenters and have no means to pay the 50% amount as contemplated under the second proviso to Sec. 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act. But the said pleading has not been substantiated by any evidence. Under the circumstances, the Appellants are directed to deposit a sum of ₹4 lakhs as a pre-deposit under Sec. 18(1) of the SARFAESI Act. The Ld. Counsel for the Appellants submits that they are depositing a demand draft for ₹1 lakhs today and the balance of
