Dismissed

Mr.v.Kuppusamy v. the Registrar

Madras HC25 Apr 2017CRP(MD)/691/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a Civil Revision Petition under Article 227 challenging a Debt Recovery Tribunal order. The Court held that an effective alternative remedy exists via appeal to the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal under the SARFAESI Act, rendering the revision untenable while granting liberty to file an appeal.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed due to existence of alternative remedy; liberty granted to file appeal with exclusion of pendency period from limitation.

Mr.v.Kuppusamy Vs the Registrar — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED:25.04.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN

¶6

C.R.P.(MD) No.691 of 2017 (PD)

¶7

Mr.V.Kuppusamy ...Petitioner/Petitioner/Applicant

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Registrar, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Madurai, III & IV Floor, Kalyani Towers, 4/162 Madurai-Melur Road, Uthangudi, Madurai-625 107. ...1st Respondent

¶10

2.The Authorized Officer, Indian Bank, Thiruchengodu Branch, TGN Complex, West Car Street, Anna Salai, Tiruchengodu, Nammakal District-637 211. ... Respondent/Respondent/Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order dated 09.03.2017 passed in I.A.No.374 of 2017 in S.A.No.82 of 2017 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Jesus Moris Ravi

¶13

For Second Respondent : Mr.T.Govindasamy

¶14

[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J]

¶15

Heard Mr.P.Jesus Moris Ravi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.T.Govindasamy, learned Standing counsel for the second respondent.

¶16

2.The petitioner, is before this Court by invoking the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the interlocutory order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Madurai, in I.A.No.374 of 2017 in S.A.No.82 of

¶17

¶18

2017, dated 09.03.2017. The said application was filed by the petitioner for grant of stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the sale notice dated 18.02.2017.

¶19

3.The learned standing counsel appearing for the second respondent submits that the one item of the property mentioned in the sale notice has already been sold. In the impugned order, we find that the Tribunal has imposed a condition on the petitioner for grant of order of interim stay. If the petitioner is aggrieved by such order, then his remedy is before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal and there is no error of jurisdiction warranting interference of this Court in exercising the supervisory power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Further more, the SARFAESI Act is a self contained code providing for hierarchy of remedy to the aggrieved person. Therefore, the petitioner, if aggrieved by the order of Debt Recovery Tribunal, has to prefer an appeal. The present attempt of the petitioner to approach this Court is thoroughly misconceived.

¶20

4.For the above reasons, since there is an effective alternative remedy available to the petitioner, this civil revision petition cannot be entertained. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to file an appeal as against the impugned order. The Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, while computing the limitation for filing the appeal, shall exclude the period between 20.03.2017, when this revision was presented before this Court and the date on which, the certified copy of this order is issued to the petitioner. No costs.

¶21

Assistant Registrar(CS I)

¶22

/TRUE COPY/

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

¶25

The Registrar, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Madurai, III & IV Floor, Kalyani Towers, 4/162 Madurai-Melur Road, Uthangudi, Madurai-625 107.

¶26

+1cc to Mr.P.Jesus Moris Ravi, Advocate SR.No.54462 +1cc to Mr.T.Govindasamy, Advocate SR.No.54230

¶27

¶28

sm:BS:SAR 4:12.5.2017:2p/4c

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶30

C.R.P.(MD).No.691 of 2017(PD) 25.04.2017

Mr.v.Kuppusamy v. the Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.v.Kuppusamy v. the Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Director of School Edu Vs the Corporate Manager

The Chairman Vs v.Sasikumar

V.Subramanian, S/O Vellaichamy Vs the Principal District Judge

The Divisional Manager Vs Karthigai Veni

M/S.Pavai Alloys and Steels Vs the Authorized Officer

The Director of Elementary Vs Little Flower Middle School