Dismissed

A.Balasubrmanian v. the District Collector and

Madras HC5 Nov 2019WP/40099/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a batch of Writ Petitions challenging orders under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, the High Court held that alternative remedies under Section 17 of the Act are available. Consequently, courts cannot maintain Writ Petitions challenging such orders without exhausting the statutory appeal.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed; liberty granted to challenge the order in the manner known to law.

A.Balasubrmanian Vs the District Collector and — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 05.11.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN

¶5

W.P.40099 OF 2006 AND M.P.S.2 & 3 OF 2006

A.Balasubramanian

... Petitioner

Versus

The District Collector and District Magistrate, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.

¶10

Standard Chartered Bank, rep. by its Authorised Signatory and Power of Attorney Holder Mr.Sudhir Balram, No.58, Armenian Street, Chennai-1. 3. S.Kubendran, S/o.Mr.Subbarayalu, No.6-A, Navalar Nagar, Thirumangalam High Road, Anna Nagar East, Chennai-40. ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER:

¶12

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent in Proceedings R.C.No.29923 of 2006, M2 dated 28.02.2006 quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to forbear themselves from initiating any action against the property at Plot No.39, 4^th Main Road, Indian Bank Colony, Ambattur, Chennai-53, which is not the property alleged to be mortgaged by the 3^rd respondent with the 2^nd respondent.

¶13

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

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Kannadhasan for Mr.P.Muthukumarasaamy For Respondents : Mr.I.Sathish, Addl.Govt.Pleader

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

This Writ Petition has been challenging the order passed under Sec.14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Ordinance, 2002 (hereinafter called as “SARFAASI Act”). Against the order passed under Sec.14 of SARFAAESI Act, the petitioner has an alternative remedy, appeal under Sec.17 of the SARFAAESI Act. Without availing the said remedy, the petitioner cannot maintain Writ petition. A Division Bench of this Court in a batch of Writ Petitions in W.P. Nos.41174 and 43734 of 2006 dated 29.08.2019 has held that the Writ Petition cannot be maintained challenging the order passed under Sec.14 of SARFAAESI Act. In the said circumstances, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to challenge the order in the manner known to law. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions in M.P.s 2 and 3 of 2006 are closed.

¶17

Sd/-

¶18

Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶19

//True Copy//

¶20

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶21

rpp

¶22

¶23