ORDER : 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Devang Lathigara for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. J.R.Shah for respondent No.2. 2. By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “A. That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the notice at Annexure F to this petition by which the respondent Bank took the possession of the petitioners property declaring the same as illegal, void and violative of the fundamental rights. B. Pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to restrain the respondent No.2 bank from proceeding further pursuant to the notice at Annexure F by an appropriate writ, order or direction. C. The Registry of DRT may be directed to accept the appeal under section 17 of the SARFESAI Act, and the Registry may not insist for court fees as required to be paid by the borrower since the petitioner is neither borrower nor guarantor and only fees qua equivalent to be value of the flat by the petitioner may be insisted.” 3. Brief facts of the case are as under: 3.1 The petitioner, who is a resident of village-Jetpur, District-Rajkot, purchased a flat by paying a full consideration to respondent No.1. 3.2 It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has obtained financial assistance from respondent No.2. Therefore, respondent No.2 initiated the proceedings under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [‘SARFAESI Act’ for short]. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the initiation of the proceedings, preferred Securitization Application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. 3.3 It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is not liable to pay the Court fees on the entire amount claimed by respondent No.2-Bank but the petitioner is liable to pay the Court fees to the Tribunal only with regard to the amount of valuation of the flat which is purchased by the petitioner. 4. 3.3 It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is not liable to pay the Court fees on the entire amount claimed by respondent No.2-Bank but the petitioner is liable to pay the Court fees to the Tribunal only with regard to the amount of valuation of the flat which is purchased by the petitioner. 4. Learned advocate Mr.Lathigara for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the Court fees as per the valuation of the flat and on payment of such fees, the Securitization Application filed by the petitioner is required to be registered by the Tribunal. 5. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr. Shah appearing for respondent No.2-Bank relied upon Rule 13 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 [for short ‘Rules,2002’] which prescribes the schedule of fees payable and submitted that as per clause (d) of sub-section (2) of section 13, the petitioner is liable to pay the Court fee of Rs. 50,000/- on the application under section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. 6. It was submitted that the respondent-Bank has to recover the secured amount of Rs. 4 crore from the borrower. 7. Considering the above submissions, it would be germane to refer to the Rule 13 of the Rules, 2002 which reads as under: “13. Fees for applications and appeals under sections 17 and 18 of the Act. - (1) Every application under sub-section (1) of section 17 or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under sub-section (1) of section 18 shall be accompanied by a fee provided in the sub-rule (2) and such fee may be remitted through a crossed demand draft drawn on a bank or Indian Postal Order in favour of the Registrar of the Tribunal or the Court as the case may be, payable at the place where the Tribunal or the Court is situated. (2) The amount of fee payable shall be as follows: No. Nature of Application Amount of Free payable 1 Application to a Debt Recovery Tribunal under subsection (1) of section 17 against any of the measures referred to in subsection (4) of section 13 (a) Where the applicant is a borrower and the amount of debt due is less than Rs. 10 lakhs Rs. 500 for every Rs. 1 lakh or part thereof (b) Where the applicant is a borrower and the amount of debt due is Rs. 10 lakhs Rs. 500 for every Rs. 1 lakh or part thereof (b) Where the applicant is a borrower and the amount of debt due is Rs. 10 lakhs and above Rs. 5,000+Rs. 250 for every Rs. 1 lakh or part thereof in excess of Rs. 10 lakhs subject to a maximum of Rs. 1,00,000 (c) Where the applicant is an aggrieved party other than the borrower and where the amount of debt due is less than Rs. 10 lakhs Rs. 125 for every Rupees One lakh or part thereof (d) Where the applicant is an aggrieved party other than the borrower and where the amount of debt due is Rs. 10 lakhs and above Rs. 1250+Rs. 125 for every Rs. 1 lakh or part thereof in excess of Rs. 10 lakhs subject to a maximum of Rs. 50,000 (e) Any other application by any Appeal to the Appellate Authority against any order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal under section 17 Same fees as provided at clauses (a) to (e) of serial number 1 of this rule. 8. In view of the aforesaid Rule, the applicant who is an aggrieved party other than borrower and as the amount of debt due is Rs. 10 lakhs and above, such applicant is required to pay the maximum fees of Rs. 50,000/-. 9. Considering the following definition of the ‘debt’ as per section 2(g) of The Recovery Of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 [for short ‘RDB Act’] read with section 2(ha) of the SARFAESI Act, the petitioner is liable to pay the Court fees on the amount of debt due which would be the amount to be recovered by the respondent No.2-Bank from the borrower and accordingly, the petitioner is liable to pay maximum Court fee of Rs. 50,000/- as per clause (d) of sub-section (2) of Rule 13 of the Rule, 2002: “(I) RDB Act, 1993 2[(g) “debt” means any liability (inclusive of interest) which is claimed as due from any person by a bank or a financial institution or by a consortium of banks or financial institutions during the course of any business activity undertaken by the bank or the financial institution or the consortium under any law for the time being in force, in cash or otherwise, whether secured or unsecured, or assigned, or whether payable under a decree or order of any civil court or any arbitration award or otherwise or under a mortgage and subsisting on, and legally recoverable on, the date of the application [and includes any liability towards debt securities which remains unpaid in full or part after notice of ninety days served upon the borrower by the debenture trustee or any other authority in whose favour security interest is created for the benefit of holders of debt securities or;]]” (II) “Section 2(ha) of the SARFAESI Actha) “debt” shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (g) of section 2 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (51 of 1993) and includes— (i) unpaid portion of the purchase price of any tangible asset given on hire or financial lease or conditional sale or under any other contract; (ii) any right, title or interest on any intangible asset or licence or assignment of such intangible asset, which secures the obligation to pay any unpaid portion of the purchase price of such intangible asset or an obligation incurred or credit otherwise extended to enable any borrower to acquire the intangible asset or obtain licence of such asset;]” 10. In view of the above position of law this petition is not entertained with liberty to the petitioner to deposit the amount of Rs. 50,000/- before the Tribunal if the petitioner wishes to pursue the securitization application filed before the Tribunal. 11. The Tribunal may consider the Securitization Application considering the pendency of this petition since 2019. 12. The petition is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid direction. Notice is discharged.