REPRESENTATION AND OBJECTION UNDER SECTION 13(3A) OF THE SECURITISATION AND RECONSTRUCTION OF FINANCIAL ASSETS AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ACT, 2002
WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO MY RIGHTS AND CONTENTIONS
Date: 5 April 2026
Place: Mumbai
To
The Authorised Officer (Shri / Smt. Anil Verma)
State Bank of India
Andheri East Branch
Ground Floor, Sagar Tech Plaza, Sakinaka Junction, Andheri East, Mumbai 400072, Maharashtra
From
Rajesh Kumar Sharma
Flat 402, Shanti Residency, 14 Nehru Road, Andheri East, Mumbai 400069, Maharashtra
Mobile: +91 XXXXX XXXXX
Email: rajesh.sharma@example.com
LOAN ACCOUNT NUMBER: 38291045672
FACILITY: Housing Loan
YOUR DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 13(2): Reference SBI/AND-E/SARFAESI/2026/117, dated 1 April 2026
AMOUNT DEMANDED: ₹52,18,430 (Rupees Fifty Two Lakh Eighteen Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty only) as on 3 April 2026
Sir / Madam,
Subject: Representation and objection under section 13(3A) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 read with Rule 3A of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, against your demand notice dated 1 April 2026 in loan account 38291045672 — your reasoned reply is required within fifteen days
1. WHO I AM AND WHAT NOTICE THIS REPLIES TO
1.1 I am Rajesh Kumar Sharma, the Borrower named in your demand notice referred to above, in respect of loan account 38291045672 (Housing Loan) maintained at your Andheri East Branch. I am a "borrower" within the meaning of section 2(1)(f) of the Act, which includes not only the person to whom financial assistance was granted but also any person who has given a guarantee or created a mortgage or pledge as security for it. The facility was originally sanctioned in the sum of ₹45,00,000 (Rupees Forty Five Lakh only).
1.2 Your demand notice is dated 1 April 2026 and reached me on 2 April 2026 by registered post with A/D.
1.3 By that notice you have demanded payment of ₹52,18,430 (Rupees Fifty Two Lakh Eighteen Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty only) as due as on 3 April 2026, and you have described the following as the secured assets intended to be enforced in the event of non-payment:
Flat No. 402, 4th Floor, Shanti Residency, CTS No. 214/B, Village Marol, 14 Nehru Road, Andheri East, Mumbai 400069, admeasuring 78.5 sq. m. carpet area, together with one covered car parking space.
1.4 This letter is my representation and objection under section 13(3A) of the Act, made as soon as practicable after receipt of your notice.
1.5 This representation is made by me jointly with the following persons, each of whom adopts its contents and signs at the foot of this letter:
Sunita Sharma — Co-borrower
Mahesh Kumar Sharma — Guarantor
2. WHAT THE LAW REQUIRES YOU TO DO WITH THIS LETTER
2.1 Section 13(3A) of the Act provides that where, on receipt of a notice under section 13(2), the borrower makes a representation or raises an objection, the secured creditor shall consider that representation or objection; and that if the secured creditor concludes that it is not acceptable or tenable, it shall communicate the reasons for non-acceptance to the borrower within fifteen days of receiving it.
2.2 Rule 3A of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 places the same duty on the Authorised Officer: to consider the representation or objection and to examine whether it is acceptable or tenable, and to communicate the reasons if it is not.
2.3 I therefore ask you to place this letter before the Authorised Officer, to consider each ground below on its merits, and to send me a reasoned written reply dealing with each ground separately, within fifteen days, at the postal address and email address given above. A reply that merely repeats the demand, or that says the objection is "not tenable" without reasons, does not answer section 13(3A).
2.4 The period of sixty days referred to in section 13(2) runs from the date of your notice, 1 April 2026. I ask that no measure under section 13(4) of the Act be initiated until you have considered this representation and communicated your reasons to me in writing.
2.5 Nothing in this letter is an admission. It is not an admission of the correctness of the amount claimed, of the classification of the account, of the validity of the notice, or of any liability, save to the extent (if any) expressly admitted below. It is written under reserve of all my rights and contentions.
3. GROUNDS OF OBJECTION
3.1 In summary, my objection is this:
The account was classified as a non-performing asset even though the arrears were cleared before the ninety-day period expired, and two payments made in April and May 2026 have still not been credited. The amount of Rs. 52,18,430 demanded therefore overstates the outstanding by at least Rs. 6,80,000. I ask that the notice be withdrawn and a certified statement of account be furnished.
GROUND — The account has been wrongly or prematurely classified as a non-performing asset
Your power to issue a notice under section 13(2) arises only where the account has been classified as a non-performing asset in accordance with the directions or guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India or other applicable regulator, as required by the definition in section 2(1)(o) of the Act. The Reserve Bank's Master Circular on Prudential Norms on Income Recognition, Asset Classification and Provisioning pertaining to Advances requires, in the case of a term loan, that interest or an instalment of principal must have remained overdue for more than ninety days before the account is classified as non-performing; in the case of a cash credit or overdraft, that the account must have remained "out of order" for that period.
The classification in my case does not meet that standard, for the following reasons:
The instalment due on 5 February 2026 was cleared on 18 April 2026 by NEFT (UTR SBIN2604181234567). At no point between February and April 2026 did any instalment remain overdue for more than ninety days. The e-mandate for the March 2026 instalment was returned unpaid because the branch had not updated my new account number after the core banking migration on 2 March 2026, as confirmed in the branch's email of 11 March 2026.
The date of classification appearing in the records and communications available to me is 4 April 2026, which cannot be reconciled with the facts set out above.
If the classification is wrong, the notice founded on it cannot stand and must be withdrawn. The exact date of classification, the ledger balance and days past due on that date, and the precise basis on which the classification was made, are asked for at paragraph 4.4(c) below.
GROUND — The amount demanded is not correct
Section 13(3) of the Act requires the notice under section 13(2) to give details of the amount payable by the borrower. The amount of ₹52,18,430 (Rupees Fifty Two Lakh Eighteen Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty only) shown as payable as on 3 April 2026 is not correct, for the following reasons:
Interest has been charged at 11.40 per cent per annum from July 2025, whereas the sanction letter dated 9 June 2022 and the reset advice dated 1 July 2025 fix the rate at 9.15 per cent per annum. The excess works out to approximately Rs. 2,14,000. Legal and inspection charges of Rs. 47,500 appear in the account without any prior intimation or invoice.
Without admitting liability for the balance, and entirely without prejudice to the grounds in this letter, the amount that I am presently able to reconcile as outstanding is ₹45,20,000 (Rupees Forty Five Lakh Twenty Thousand only). The difference between that figure and your demand is the subject of this objection.
The certified statement of account and the head-wise break-up needed to test the figure are asked for at paragraphs 4.4(a) and 4.4(b) below.
GROUND — Payments actually made have not been credited to the account