The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging recovery proceedings under the SARFAESI Act and limitation issues. The Court held that efficacious alternative remedies existed before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, barring further recourse to the High Court under Article 226.
Writ petition dismissed; no order as to costs.
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 JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:13.09.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.P.No.19138 of 2021
Jwalia IT Solution Pvt Ltd. Rep.by its Director Mr.G.Vimal Raj Old No.12, New No.23, Neelakanta Madha Street, T.Nagar, Chennai-17.
.. Petitioner Vs.
The Authorised Officer State Bank of India Teynampet, Chennai 600 018. .. Respondent
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Declaration to declare that the claim of the respondent bank is barred by limitation vide application of Art 137 of the Limitation prescribing a period of 3 years for any special Act r/w Section 36 of the SARFAESI Act, declare that the respondent Bank cannot issue more than one Sec.13(2) Demand Notice and the claim would be related to that issued for the 1st time only in which the debt cannot be recrystalised of the same date, and declare that the OTS offer has to be sent every borrower and not only one to the mortgagor.
For the Petitioner : Mr.B.Gurumurthy
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The petitioner complains of execution proceedings being instituted before the Recovery Officer of the relevant Debts Recovery Tribunal at a belated stage. The other grievance of the petitioner is that the steps taken by the respondent secured creditor under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 are also barred by limitation.
W.P.No.19138 of 2021 is dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CO)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
sra/kst
To
The Authorised Officer
State Bank of India Asset Recovery Management Branch, 44,Eldams Road,
1st Floor,
Teynampet, Chennai 600 018.
W.P.No.19138 of 2021
PVS (CO) K.RK. (21.09.2021)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can approach the High Court for relief regarding execution proceedings barred by limitation.
Whether the applicant is entitled to challenge measures under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act before this Court.
Whether efficacious alternative remedies exist to preclude the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Jwalia IT Solution Pvt Ltd
The Authorised Officer, State Bank of India
Sanjeev Banerjee
P. D. Audikessavalu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
