Term loan of Rs.4,19,546/- was later extended to the partnership firm. It is also the case of the respondent that, the payments were defaulted and the MSME account and Working Capital Term loan was classified as NPA on with effect from 29.07.2022, 29.12.2022 and subsequently the demand notice dated 31.10.2023 was issued. Since no repayments were forthcoming the possession notice dated 01.12.2024 was issued and published. The 1st respondent further contends that, since being the secured creditor, the 1st respondent is entitled to approach the Ld. Magistrate and as permitted under the law procured in the impugned order. The respondent bank further denies the contention of the applicant that, there is no service of demand notice and point out that the applicant had promptly replied to the demand notice by filing a representation. The respondent further contends that, having executed the loan documents and offered the secured asset as security for the credit facility, the applicant cannot now turn back and contend that the said security ought not to be proceeded against. It is pointed by the respondent that the bank is at liberty to proceed against the hypotheca as well as the secured assets and the case of the applicant in this regard is to be discarded. In respect for the possession notice also the respondent contends that, the same is duly published and affixed as required under the statute.
