R. Mallesham, v. State Bank Of India, Rep. By Its Authorized Officer,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION No. 1056 of 2017 ORDER: (Per VRS,J) The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition, challenging a notice issued under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.

2.

Heard Mr. P. Nageswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner.

3.

As against a notice under Section 13(2), no cause of action would arise. The petitioner has to give a reply and the 1st respondentBank has to pass orders under Section 13(3A). Thereafter, if the 1st respondent-Bank takes action under Section 13(4), it is only then that the petitioner will have a cause of action. Therefore, leaving it open to the petitioner to give a reply to the notice, the Writ Petition is dismissed.

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions if any pending in the writ petition shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs. __________________________ V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J _____________________ G. SHYAM PRASAD, J 6th January, 2017 cbs

VRS,J & GSP,J WP No. 1056 of 2017 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN √ AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G. SHYAM PRASAD Writ Petition No. 1056 of 2017 (dismissed) 6th January, 2017 cbs