This court disposed of a writ challenge to a Section 13(2) notice under the SRA Act where the petitioner failed to objected under Section 13(3-A).
The petitioner will be at liberty to approach the bank to get the account settled.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10727 of 2007 (6) dt.18-11-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10727 of 2007
| ====================================================== Ram Kripal Mahto, son of late Ram Jag Singh, resident of Mohalla- Khilarganj, P.O.& P.S.-Sasaram, District-Rohtas, at present B.K.Dutta Lane New Jakkanpur, Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, South Gandhi Maidan, Patna. 2. The Assistant General Manager (Authorized Officer) State Bank of India, Patna Secretariat branch, Sichai Bhawan, Patna. 3. Manager, Bihar State Financial Corporation, Patna Branch, Indira Bhawan, Patna. 4. Branch Manager, Bihar State Financial Corporation, Patna Branch, Indira Bhawan, Patna. 5. Umesh Chandra Pandey, son of late Ram Dayal Pandey, resident of Mohalla-B.K.Dutta Lane, New Jakkanpur, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== |
|
|---|---|
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha 3 Mr. Arun Kumar Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad |
|
| For the Respondent/s : Mr. /Mrs.Nilu Agrawal Mr. Mukesh Kumar Thakur Mr. Girijesh Kumar Mr. P.K.Shahi Mr. Bibhakar Singh Mr. K.C.Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANANDAN SINGH ORAL ORDER |
|
| 6 | 18-11-2013 This writ application has been filed challenging a notice |
| under Section 13(2) of the Securitization & Reconstruction Of Financial Assets & Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. From the pleadings of the writ application it does not appear that the petitioner has filed any objection to the said notice in terms of Sub-Section 3-A of Section 13 of the Act. In the |
Patna High Court CWJC No.10727 of 2007 (6) dt.18-11-2013
circumstances, the notice of demand does not stand challenged before the Bank. Hence, this Court does not find any error in the notice. However, petitioner will be at liberty to approach the Bank, if advised, to get the account settled by repaying the dues.
This writ application is disposed of accordingly.
(Jayanandan Singh, J)
Arvind/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitization & Reconstruction Of Financial Assets & Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 suffered any error in view of the petitioner not filing o
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Ram Kripal Mahto
The Chief General Manager, State Bank of India, South Gandhi Maidan, Patna
The Assistant General Manager (Authorized Officer) State Bank of India, Patna Secretariat branch
Manager, Bihar State Financial Corporation, Patna Branch
Branch Manager, Bihar State Financial Corporation, Patna Branch
Umesh Chandra Pandey
Jayanandan Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
