In order to substantiate their contention, the Bank encl0sed relevant material documents along with the Reply frled by them. As per the said documents, it is clear that after compliance of Sectionl3(3A) of the SARFAESI Act, 2oo2, the Respondent Bank issued possession notice dt.24.lI.2O2O and the said notice was sent to the Applicant through Regd. Post and the same was received by the Applicant as evidenced by the postal acknowledgements filed by the Bank. The said possession notice was affixed on the schedule properties as depicted in the copies of photographs filed by the Bank and the said notice was published in Telugu and English daily newspapers as evidenced by the copies of paper publication filed by the Bank. Thus the Respondent Bank has duly complied with Rule g(l)&(2) of Securit5r Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 in issuing possession notice to the Applicant. Thereafter the bank issued pre-sale notice dt.OZ .Ot.2O2l u/r g(6) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2OO2 for giving an opportunity to the Applicant to redeem the secured assets by paying the entire outstanding dues within 30 days and admittedly, the Applicant received the said notice. But the Applicant has not taken any steps for redeeming the schedule properties by paying the amount due. Thereafter, the Bank issued the e Auction sale Notice dt.o4.o3.2027 to the Applicant and the said notice was published in The Hindu and Eenadu daily newspapers as evidenced by the copies of paper publication filed by the bank and the same was also affixed on the schedure properties as depicted in the copies of photographs filed by the Bank. Before issuing the said sale notice, the e_g*{ffi$tuation reports dt.tl.12.2o2o from the approved eviderrced by the copies of valuation N reports 'urrt 2trlclx5* .rn TI', Fourse tiurseof Iarguqrelf$,l ".9u4,.11$.,::both the Ld. counsel submitted that pi1Lf,gl.lt:r+fP..l$i}# "Auction Sale Notice dt.o4.03.2021, :::"s ..,".,IJ ;r;,y,.., !$
