The Court held that petitioners aggrieved by a sale conducted under SARFAESI Act must approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The writ petition challenging the sale deed was dismissed as not maintainable.
Writ petition dismissed as not maintainable; petitioners to approach DRT if aggrieved by sale.
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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/18TH PHALGUNA, 1937
WP(C).No. 2720 of 2016 (L)
PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------
1. SHAJU, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. SASIDHARAN, SHAJU BHAVAN, NALLANADU VILLAGE, VENJARUMOODU (PO), THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM.
2. PRASEETHA, AGED 33 YEARS, D/O. RADHAMANI, SHAJU BHAVAN, NALLANADU VILLAGE, VENJARUMOODU (PO), THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.G.P.SHINOD
SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. SRI.GOVIND PADMANAABHAN SRI.AJIT G.ANJARLEKAR
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
1. KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK, HEAD OFFICE, KOLLAM - 691 001,
3. PRADEEP,
4. PRAN KUMAR, PRADEEP BHAVAN, KOTTUKKAL VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 506.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
msv/
WP(C).No. 2720 of 2016 (L)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO 3218 OF THE SRO, CHADAYAMANGALAM, DATED 22-08-2011
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
Ms v/
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
W.P.(C).NO.2720 OF 2016 (L)
Dated this the 8th day of March, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P7 sale deed that was issued by the respondent bank in favour of the auction purchaser, in a sale conducted under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstructions of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, hereinafter referred to as the 'SARFAESI Act'. Although various contentions are raised in the writ petition challenging Ext.P7 sale deed, I am of the view that if the petitioners are aggrieved by the sale deed conducted by the 1st respondent bank, in proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, then the remedy of the petitioners lies in approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal [DRT] with an application for setting aside the sale and getting the matter adjudicated before the said Forum. Accordingly, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners, if any, to approach the DRT for setting aside Ext.P7 sale deed, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
prp/8/3/16
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging a sale deed under SARFAESI Act is maintainable in the High Court.
Whether the remedy for aggrieved petitioners lies with the Debts Recovery Tribunal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SHAJU
PRASEETHA
KOLLAM DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
