Legal Question in Banking Law in India

NOTICE U/S 13[2] OF THE SARFAESI ACT, INDIA DT.15.7.2010 WAS ISSUED BY THE BANK & DESPATCHED ON 23.07.2010. NOTICES WERE RECEIVED ON VARIOUS DATES BY THE BORROWERS & GUARANTORS. 60 DAYS NOTICE PERIOD TO EXPIRE LATEST BY END OF SEPTEMBER 2010. SUDDENLY IN THE MORNING OF 5.10.2010, THE BANKERS HAVE PASTED THE XEROX OF THE ORIGINAL NOTICE DT.15.7.2010] IN THE FRONT DOOR OF THE BORROWER OFFICE. THIS IS A MERE XEROX COPY. NO ALTERATION, AMENDMENT, MODIFICATION, ENDORSEMENT & NO ATTESTATION. NO PANCHANAMA AS PER RULE OF LAW WAS PRODUCED/SERVED ON THE BORROWER. WHAT IS THE REMEDY TO THE BORROWER? WHAT WOULD BE THE REASON BEHIND THIS ACTION OF THE BANKER? CAN THE BORROWER CLAIM 60 DAYS NOTICE PERIOD WEF THE DATE OF AFFIXING THE COPY ON THE DOOR, ie 6O DAYS FROM 05.10.2010


Asked on 10/06/10, 11:48 pm

2 Answers from Attorneys
J. Radhakrishnan independent Practice

If notice sent earlier has not been received, the borrower can take advantage of the date of notice affixed on the door. Anyhow, better give a reply. If notice sent has not been received by the concerned borrower, the rules provide for publication in News Papers. If that procedure is not followed, the borrower concerned can challenge the follow up action under Sec.13(4) by filing appeal under Sec.17. In any case, if notice has been received , better give a reply, if there is valid defence to the notice. The Bank has to respond the same within a week of receipt of that reply.

Read more
Answered on 10/07/10, 11:19 am
Vishwa Arya Arya & Co.

best course is to challenge under section 17

Read more
Answered on 10/08/10, 11:20 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Banking Law questions and answers in India