HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1601 of 2025 Deep Chandra Joshi …....Petitioner Versus Nainital Bank, Brank M.B.P.G. Campus, Nainital Road, Haldwani, District Nainital, Through its Authorized Officer ….….Respondent Present:- Ms. Pushpa Joshi, Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Chenta Latwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Kumar Joshi, Advocate for the respondent. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) The challenge in this petition is made to a communication dated 26.02.2025 by the respondent, by which, action under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“SARFAESI Act”) has been withdrawn against the petitioner and demand notice dated 01.02.2023 has also been withdrawn. But, the petitioner was required to pay interest on the amount in monthly instalment of Rs.33,637/- till June, 2026. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. It appears that a notice under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued against the petitioner, which was challenged by the petitioner in WPMS No. 3403 of 2024, Deep Chandra Joshi Vs. Nainital Bank. In that proceedings, the petitioner was given liberty to make representation with further direction to the respondent to decide it. It is thereafter, the impugned communication has been made. 2 4. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is not in a position to pay this heavy instalment. The petitioner seeks extension of time. 5. These are the action under the SARFAESI Act. The SARFAESI Act is self contained in itself. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any action, he may challenge it under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. 6. Insofar as, redetermination of instalment is concerned, it relates to the financial capacity resources of the petitioner. This Court has no such material before it. The petitioner may definitely approach the respondent Bank to re-determine the amount of instalment by reducing the amount and extending the period. This Court has no doubt if genuine proposal in this regard is made by the petitioner, the respondent Bank shall consider it in accordance with law and existing rules and regulations. 7. With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. (Ravindra Maithani, J) 09.06.2025 Jitendra