Writ petition filed to quash a notice under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 regarding symbolic possession of mortgaged property was dismissed as not maintainable due to lack of jurisdiction and existence of an alternative statutory remedy.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No. 1842 of 2018
Maheshwar Prasad Saw ….. Petitioner
Versus
Punjab National Bank, through its authorised Officer, Chiragora Branch, Dhanbad ….. Respondent
CORAM
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
For the Petitioner: Mr. Raj Kishore Sahu For the Respondent: Mr. Pratyush Kumar
07/28.01.2021 The case is taken up through Video Conferencing.
Mr. Raj Kishore Sahu, learned A.C to Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, undertakes to deposit the deficit Court fee within two weeks.
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the notice dated 19.11.2016 whereby the respondents have taken symbolic possession of the mortgaged property of the petitioner under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the SARFAESI Act, 2002’).
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Though the petitioner has challenged the notice dated 19.11.2016 said to have been issued by the respondent-Bank to the petitioner under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, yet a copy of the same has not been annexed with the writ petition. Moreover, the present writ petition was filed in the month of April, 2018, but the required Court fee has not yet been deposited by the petitioner.
Be that as it may.
Since the petitioner has put challenge to the notice dated 19.11.2016 said to have been issued by the respondent-Bank taking symbolic possession of the mortgaged property of the petitioner, he has got an alternative/statutory remedy provided under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Hence, I am not inclined to entertain the present writ petition at this stage.
The present writ petition is accordingly dismissed as not maintainable. The petitioner is however at liberty to work out the remedy provided
under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
(RAJESH SHANKAR, J)
Satish/-
Maheshwar Prasad Saw
Punjab National Bank
RAJESH SHANKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
