Dismissed

M/s.Velmurugan Traders v. The Authorized Officer

Madras HC2 Feb 2021WP/2027/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a demand notice and subsequent possession and sale notices issued by the Indian Overseas Bank. The court held that the secured creditor's actions after receiving a representation are not justiciable before the High Court as Section 17 provides an efficacious alternative remedy.

What did the court decide?

No order as to costs. No events to the outcome of the options under the writ manner are granted.

M/s.Velmurugan Traders Vs The Authorized Officer — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 02.02.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶7

W.P.No.2027 of 2021

¶8

M/s. Velmurugan Traders

¶9

rep. by its Partner Renuka Palanisamy W/o. Palanisamy

¶10

No.4/139, K P Karadu Nethimedu Salem 636 002. ... Petitioner Vs. The Authorised Officer Indian Overseas Bank Regional Office Five Road Salem 636 004. ... Respondent

¶11

Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Certiorari to call for the entire records pertaining to the Demand notice to the Borrower / Guarantor / Mortgagor under Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, RO/LAW/DN/12/2020-21 dated 18.08.2020 and quash the same and further entire proceedings initiated by the respondent bank including Possession Notice dated 27.11.2020 and impugned Sale Notice RO/LAW/AN/ /2020-21 dated 21.12.2020 issued by the respondent Bank and quash the same.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sivakumar ORDER (Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶13

This is a clear attempt by the writ petitioner to overreach.

¶14

According to the writ petitioner, a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 was

¶15

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

¶16

issued at a stage when the account was in order and had not become a non-performing asset. The writ petitioner contends that despite a detailed reply being issued, the respondent-Bank did not take such reply into consideration and proceeded to take steps under Section 13(4) of the said Act.

¶17

It is elementary that what a secured creditor does upon a receipt of a reply to the notice under Section 13(2) of the Act is not justiciable. Sub-section (3A) was introduced into Section 13 of the Act only to ensure that an opportunity was afforded to a debtor to make a representation and so that such representation would be on the file and, hopefully, be considered by the secured creditor before the secured creditor resorted to taking measures under Section 13(4) of the Act. However, if the secured creditor proceeds to take measures after receiving the representation under Section 13(3A), it is for the debtor, if aggrieved, to take steps under Section 17 of the Act in respect of the measures taken under Section 13(4) thereof.

¶18

Since there is an efficacious alternative remedy available to the writ petitioner to approach a specified forum, cast with a duty to undertake an adjudication of the kind that the writ petitioner seeks, this extraordinary jurisdiction cannot, ordinarily, be invoked. For the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is not entertained and the petitioner is left free to pursue the remedies in accordance with law.

¶19

W.P.No.2027 of 2021 is dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. As a consequence, WMP No.2298 of 2021 is also dismissed.

¶20

Sd/Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

¶21

kpl The Authorised Officer Indian Overseas Bank Regional Office Five Road,Salem 636 004.

¶22

W.P.No.2027 of 2021

¶23

SRII(CO) RMP(16/02/2021)

¶24

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

M/s.Velmurugan Traders v. The Authorized Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Velmurugan Traders v. The Authorized Officer

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

P.Naveen Chakravarthy Vs Punjab National Bank

K.S.Muraliprasad Vs the Deputy Registrar (Dairying)

Sri Kannanur Mariamman Eri Neer Vs The District Collector

The Government of Tamil Nadu Vs C.Dharmalingam

R.Parthiban Vs Idbi Bank Ltd.

M.Viswanathan Vs Union of India