Applicant and others and the said notice was served on the Applicant as evidenced by the postal acknowledgements liled by the Respondent. After receiving the said demand notice, the Applicant also raised objections vide their letter dt.Ol.O4.2O24 and sent the same to the bank and on receipt of the said objections, the Bank issued their Reply vide letter dt.O2.O4.2O24. In fact, the Applicant filed copy of the said reply issued by the bank. Thus the bank has duly complied with Section 13(3A) of the SARFAESI Act,2OO2 in giving reply to tl e objections raised by the Applicant in response to the demand notice issued by the Respondent bank. Thereafter, the Respondent issued possession notice dt.15.O4.2O24 and sent the same to the Applicant through Regd. post as evidenced by the postal track reports filed by the Respondent. In fact, the Applicant filed copy of the said possession notice along with the SA which clearly indicates that the Applicant received the said notice. The said possession notice was published in Telugu and English daily newspapers as evidenced by the copies of the paper publication filed by the Respondent and the said notice was affixed on the schedule property as depicted in the copies of photographs filed by the Respondent. Hence in the circumstances, it is quite clear that the Respondent has scrupulously complied with Rule 8(1)&(2) of Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 in taking possession of the secured asset u/s 13(a) of the SARFAESI Act,2OO2 and so, the impugned possession notice dt. 15.04.2024 is perfectly legal and valid. Accordingly, this point is answered in favour of the Respondent and against the Applicant.
