as the Power of Attorney holder of the owners of the property. The property belongs to the first Appellant and her mother. It was purchased by the father of the first Appellant through a Power of Attorney (POA) holder. The property was subsequently mortgaged using the same POA. It is contended that the mother of the first Appellant who was a joint owner of the property and had never executed any POA in favour of her husband to mortgage the property and on the date of mortgage the mother of the first Appellant had already expired. Therefore, even if there was any Power of Attorney executed by her, it would have expired and inoperative. It is also contended that the first Appellant’s mother had executed a Will bequeathing her share of the property in favour of Appellants Nos. 2 & 3 who are her grandchildren. They are minors and are represented by their father. There is also a contention taken up that the mortgage was created not to secure the debt incurred by the principal borrower namely Kedarnath Sugar & Agro Products Ltd., but to secure the debt allegedly taken by Green Field Resorts, and therefore, it cannot be considered as a valid mortgage to secure the debt of Kedarnath Sugar & Agro Products. It is further contended that the demand notice under Sec. 13(2) was not served properly on the Applicants.
