Dismissed

M.Ambika v. The Branch Manager

Madras HC30 Apr 2021WP/19074/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a writ petition challenging a notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. Ruling that the Debt Recovery Tribunal is the appropriate forum, the High Court held that the writ court cannot restrain a secured creditor and that an efficacious alternative remedy existed before the tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; order on costs not necessary; connected Miscellaneous Application closed.

M.Ambika Vs The Branch Manager — Consumer Protection | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 30.04.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr.SANJIB BANERJEE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶7

W.P.No.19074 of 2020
and W.M.P.No.23647 of 2020
M.Ambika .. Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Branch Manager,
Bank of Baroda,
Adayar Branch, No.77, 1 st Main Street,
Gandhi Nagar, Adayar,
Chennai 600 020.
2.M/s.Poosemperumal Impex Pvt. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Directors.
3.M.Padmavathi
4.K.Arunraj Prakash
5.K.L.Raghavan .. Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying for issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to
call for the entire records pertaining to the issuance of
impugned notice dated 11.11.2020 issued by 1 st respondent
pertaining to bring the e-auction of the immovable property on
04.12.2020 on his file and quash the same, consequently direct
the 1 st respondent not to bring any auction sale of the immovable
property in future pending outcome of SARFAESI proceedings in
O.A.No.328 of 2020 on the file of Debts Recovery Tribunal II,
Chennai.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.A.D.Janarthanan

¶9

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

¶10

ORDER

¶11

(Made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶12

The limited prayer in the writ petition is for restraining the respondent secured creditor from taking steps to sell off a secured asset because the measures adopted by such secured creditor under Section 13 (4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 have been challenged in a petition instituted before the appropriate Debts Recovery Tribunal.

¶13

Though the bank is not represented, there is no impediment to dispose of the petition.

¶14

For a start, the impugned notice dated November 11, 2020 is no longer relevant since it pertains to the auction sale being conducted on December 4, 2020. In any event, the Writ Court is not the appropriate forum to restrain a secured creditor from taking measures or doing things as permitted by the said Act of 2002. The petitioner ought to have made an interim application in the pending proceedings before the Debts Recovery Tribunal or otherwise requested the Debts Recovery Tribunal to take up the matter out of turn. Since the principal lis is pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the matter complained of ought to be carried to the Debts Recovery Tribunal ahead of this Court.

¶15

W.P.No.19074 of 2020 is dismissed on the ground that there is an efficacious alternative remedy available to the petitioner. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.No.23647 of 2020 is closed.

¶16

Sd/-

¶17

Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶18

//True Copy//

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶20

sra To

¶21

1.The Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, Adayar Branch, No.77, 1^st Main Street, Gandhi Nagar, Adayar,Chennai 600 020.

¶22

2.The Debts Recovery Tribunal,Chennai.

¶23

+1cc to Mr.A.D.Janarthanan, Advocate SR.No. 27082

¶24

W.P.No.19074 of 2020

¶25

RSV(CO) A.SK(22.06.2021)

¶26

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

M.Ambika v. The Branch Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Ambika v. The Branch Manager

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

Venkatesh Rajasekaran Vs The Authorized Officer

Kumbhat Holographics Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu

D.Dhamodharen Vs The Chief Executive Officer

M/s.Appoorva Traders Vs Syndicate Bank

Gevika Agro Food Private Limited Vs Bank of India

Anna Nagar West Extension Association Vs The District Collector