HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 953 of 2025 Arvind Singh ….....Petitioner Versus Authorized Officer/Asstt. General Manager and another ….….Respondents Present:- Mr. Sachin Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Siddharth Jain, Advocate for the respondents. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) The challenge in this petition is made to the possession notice dated 28.02.2025 (Annexure 2) issued by the respondent no.1 under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“the SARFAESI Act”). 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. It is a case of the petitioner that for running a school, he took loan from the respondents/Bank, which he could not repay on time. Now the proceedings have been taken under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the money provided he may be given some time. 2 5. Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the physical possession notice has already been given. Now auction notice has been issued and the auction is to take place on 29.04.2025. 6. The SARFAESI Act is a complete Code. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any action of the respondents, he can avail such remedy as is available under the SARFAESI Act. This Court may not interfere in the matter. 7. However, as stated by the learned counsel for the respondents that the auction is to take place on 29.04.2025. If the petitioner intends to deposit the money, he could approach the respondents and express his willingness to deposit the dues, by depositing substantial portion of it. This Court has no doubt that if such an action is taken, perhaps the respondents would consider it, in accordance with law. 8. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 03.04.2025 Jitendra