.r. The 1st Respondent frled Repry denying a, the adverse aregations made in the SA and contended that the lst Applicant is a partnership firm represented by Applicant No.2 and Respondents No.2 to 4. Applicant No. I availed various credit fac ities from the r "t Respondent by creating mortgage against the schedule properties and thereafter committed default and so, the loan accounts were classified as NpA as per the guidelines of RBI. The lst Respondent initiated proceedings under the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002 and issued demand notice dt.06.05.2014 and even after receipt of the said notice, the Applicants failed to pay the dues, the Bank issued possession notice dt.l2.O7 .2OL4 and the said notice was published in two daily newspapers and the same was also affixed on the schedule properties. Thereafter, the lst Respondent also issued e Auction Sale notice for conducting auction of the schedule properties and challenging the same, SA 286/16 was filed and the same was allowed and challenging the said orders passed in SA, Appeal No.226llg was liled before the Honble DRAT, Kolkata and the said appeal was allowed by the Hon,ble DRAT. Subsequently, the lst Respondent proceeded u/s 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2OO2 for taking physical possession of the schedule properti€s. pursuant ,11,.tn. orders of Ld.CJM, peddapalli in Crl.M.PJ,{o. 194 lA2 and challenging the said proceedings, the present sA ip tled' ff"n$fq,Ja lst Respondent p."y"a to dismiss the SA.
