6, As there is no response to the demand notice to pay the outstanding dues, the Respondent Bank issued possession notice dt.23.0 6.2028 and sent the same to the Applicants through regd. post. The Applicants are having knowledge about the said notice but their contention is that the said possession notice was not pubrished in two leading newspapers and also not affixed on the schedule property as prescribed under Rule 8(1)&(2) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002. To disprove the said contention, the Respondent Bank has filed necessary material documents viz. copies of paper publication of possession notice and photographs showing affixture of the said notice on the schedule property along with the Reply filed by them in the SA. As per the said documents, it is very clear that the Respondent Bank has published the possession Notice dt.23.o6.2o23 in New Indian Express and Eenadu daily newspa pers dt.27.O6.2O23 and the copy of the said notice was also affixed on the schedule property. So, the Applicant has failed to establish any ground for setting aside the proceedings initiated by the Respondent Bank under the SARPAESI Act against the schedule property. Hence in the circumstances, it is clear that the Respondent Bank has duly followed the procedure laid down under the provisions of SARFAESI Act and Rules, 2002 in taking possession of the schedule property u/s 13(a) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. So this point is answered against the Applicants.
