SARFAESI Act, 2002 dated 26.11.2019. In NDN No. 136 of 2024 challenge to sale notice dated 11.01.2024 and 07.02.2024 were also made. However, after dismissal of the Securitisation Application being NDN No. 136 of 2024, Appellants are not pressing the relief of challenging the possession notice under Section 13(4) of the Act. Since the challenge to the possession notice was withdrawn as not pressed, hence, challenge to sale notice was well within time which should have been heard by the Learned DRT. But Learned DRT erred in dismissing the MA No. 111 of 2024. 9. Per contra, Learned Counsel for the Respondent Bank would submit that the appeal challenging the order dated 08.05.2024 becomes infructuous as the Appellants have moved an Application for recall of the order submitting that they are not challenging the possession notice. However, it is submitted that Learned DRT has rightly arrived at a findings. Both the Appeals are liable to be dismissed. 10. NDN No. 136 of 2024 was filed challenging the possession notice dated 26.11.2019 along with sale Notice dated 11.01.2024 and 07.02.2024. It is rightly observed by the Learned DRT that challenge to the possession notice dated 26.11.2019 was barred by limitation. Learned DRT should have dismissed the Securitisation Application as far as it relates to the challenge to possession notice when in the same Securitisation Application challenge to sale notice as well as possession notice was made. Situation is different if only possession notice would have been challenged in the
