0 \l n a; y \‘lf/ OV @ Narendra Harchandani, S/o. Prabhudas Harchandani, R/o.G-§, Anupam Nagar, Raipur, (C.G.) Director & Guarantor of M/s._ Polymers Limited 639, Sector B, Urla Industrial Complex, Raipur, PETITIONER /70yi$x 0¥\\ Chhathsgarh _ r ‘ #qs" Q.“ . r$§° ééw Q. Q’ee, Q‘ég RESPONDENTS: 1. Central Bank of India, Central Bank b ndia, I, ‘ V Regional .dmvce, Choubé‘y w RaipLH", thHattisgarh VERSUS . The Z$Hal Manager, Centré'll gank 10f India, ‘ Raipur, éhHattisgarh Zonal brfiité} “Bombay Marké£, . The Senior‘ Manager, Central Ba‘n’lé‘ of India, Sadar Bazar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh‘ WRIT PET;TION UNDER ARTIciLE age/227 o‘‘i= THE c0NsTITUTION oi= INQIA @ K.P. Through: Its R:%ional Manager, iuny, IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR w.P. No. Egg; {2004 Singgg 38mm wy y XIHC 22 x ‘ 07.112004 > , ; r Shri Sanjay Ku'mar- Agrqwal, cpunsel for +he pefi‘rioner‘. None for The respondents. Heard on admission. § By invoking fhe provisians a1: secfion 13 of The Securifisation and 1 Reconsfrucfion of Financial Assets and Enforcemenf of Securify Inferesf s Acf 2002, fhe credifor éaid +9 be e Bank had faken possession of +he a g ', secured ussefs and “99 r-ieved wif thm' Praceedin9s the ‘F'efifianer has a i _ ‘chaHenge/d +he proceedings by rway o Wrif Pefifion under Arfinle 226/227 of the Consfifufion of India. When fher-e‘is a righf 1'0 appeal as provided ‘under- Secfion 17 of fhe said Act 'rhen if was’required for The person aggrieved io file an appe‘aLagainsf ‘he said proceedings and no‘l' fo come i I before ihis Cour“!- under ifs Wri‘r i‘urjsdicfion. The pe‘rifioner, if he so, desires, can file an appeai Before co ipefen'r Tribunal in accordance with law.‘ Wifh the aforesaid observm‘i ;ns and directions, The pe‘iifion sfands disposed of. I i Consequeni’ly, I.A.No.7640/O4 for urgeni‘hearing si'ands dispo/sed of. : Sd/- g ll viiay Kumar Shrivastava Judge ’ ’ w l :h