The Single Judge held that the petitioner cannot invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court to challenge an interlocutory order of the Debt Recovery Tribunal when Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act provides a statutory remedy. The writ petition was consequently dismissed.
The O.P(DRT) No. 3228 of 2012 was dismissed.
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 KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/11TH ASWINA 1934`
OP (DRT).No. 3228 of 2012 (O)
IA.21/2012 of DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/5TH RESPONDENT IN IA:
AYSHA BEEVI, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.ABDUL HAKKIM, KOTTUVILAKKAM HOUSE, VODEYAM, ARKKALA P.O.
BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:
1. THE AUTHORISED OFFICER,CHIEF MANAGER, INDIAN BANK ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH-II WILLINGTON ESTATE, CIRCLE OFFICE BUILDING 4TH FLOOR, 55/ETHRIRAJ SALAI,CHENNAI-600 008
2. CHIEF MANAGER, INDIAN BANK, HEAD OFFICE, 66 RAJAJI SALAI, CHENNAI-670 001.
3. M/S.EAST WEST TRAVEL AND TRADE, LINKS LIMITED, 75 F, NEHRU ROAD VILLE PARLE, EAST MUMBAI-400 009.
4. AHAMMED HUSSAIN, S/O.SHAMSUDDIN MUSALIYAR, PUTHENVEEDU MYLACAUD P.O. KOLLAM-691001.
THIS OP (DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BP
OP (DRT).No. 3228 of 2012 (O)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT 2/7/2012 IA 21/2012 IN IN URSA (ID NO.16029) EXT.P2: TRUE COPOY OF AFFIDAVIT FILED BEFORE DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
BP
ANTONY DOMINIC,J
O.P(DRT)No.3228 of 2012
Dated this the 03rd day of October, 2012
JUDGMENT
What is under challenge in the writ petition is Ext.P1, an order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal in an interlocutory application. Admittedly, Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, provides for an appeal against an order in the nature of Ext.P1 and I see no reason why the petitioner should bye-pass the statutory remedies and invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court.
The O.P(DRT) is dismissed.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
ln
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court by-bypassing the statutory appeal remedy provided in Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
AYSHA BEEVI
THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, CHIEF MANAGER, INDIAN BANK ASSET RECOVERY MANAGEMENT BRANCH-II
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
