CWP No.12305 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.12305 of 2010 Date of Decision: 04.08.2010 **** Papinder Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. Authorised Officer, ICICI and Anr. . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. IS Ratta, Advocate for the petitioner ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) CWP No.12305 of 2010.doc - 2 – (1). In this Civil Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the demand notice dated 18.05.2009 (Annexure P3) issued by the respondent-Bank in purported exercise of its powers under Section 13 (2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short, ‘the Act’). The petitioner’s contention is that he is liable to pay the ‘secured debt’ to the tune of Rs.14.40 lacs only along with interest and not Rs.79,85,172/- as demanded by the respondent-Bank, in the demand notice Annexure P3. (2). Admittedly no action under Section 13(4) of the Act has been taken so far. The questions raised by the petitioner are essentially mixed questions of facts and law which he can effectively raise in appeal under Section 17 of the Act as and when occasion arises after any action under Section 13 (4) of the Act. (3). With liberty afore-mentioned, the writ petition stands dismissed. (4). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 04.08.2010 vishal shonkar