AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 218 wordsThe petitioner is stated to have raised a Home Loan of Rs.6,50,000/- along with his co-borrower wife-Mrs. Kalpana Bindhani on 27.10.2005 from UCO Bank, Balasore.
The challenge in the present writ petition is to the demand notice dated 04.06.2012 issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 recalling the aggregate outstanding liability of Rs.6,60,963/- due as on 31.03.2012 together with future interest and incidental charges, costs etc.
None had appeared on behalf of the petitioner on the previous date, and Mr. B.B. Swain on the asking of the Court had put in appearance and was directed to seek instructions from the Bank.
At the time of resumed hearing today, Mr. Swain states that the impugned demand notice was withdrawn in view of the petitioner having regularized his account in the year 2012. However, for default of the payment of the installments, the loan account has been now declared NPA on 30.09.2022 and a fresh demand notice issued on 27.10.2022. He further submits that a simplicitor challenge to the demand notice is otherwise not maintainable in view of the Scheme of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
None has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner to controvert the stand of the Bank.
In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed.
.....................................