Dismissed

Mr.M.Vijayakumar, v. the Union of India

Madras HC25 Oct 2021WP(MD)/25062/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking issuance of certiorari and mandamus against a secured creditor proceeding against agricultural land, the Madras High Court dismissed the petition on the ground that disputes between defaulting borrowers and secured creditors under the SARFAESI Act fall under the jurisdiction of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, not the writ court.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed; the petitioner is left free to pursue remedies before the appropriate forum.

Mr.M.Vijayakumar, Vs the Union of India — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.25062 of 2016

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:25.10.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY W.P.(MD) No. 25062 of 2016 and W.M.P(MD)No.18137 of 2016

¶6

Mr.M.Vijayakumar .. Petitioner Vs

¶7

1.The Union of India,

¶8

Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Finance,

¶9

New Delhi.

¶10

2.The Authorised Officer/Chief Manager, Indian Bank, Bodinayakanur,

¶11

Theni District. .. Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the file of the second respondent relating to the possession notice dated 05.11.2016 in respect of the petitioner's immovable agricultural properties of an extent of 1 acres 16 cents and 5 acres 3 cents comprised in S.Nos.761 and 762/2 at Patta No.729, Bodinayakanur Village, Bodinayakanur Taluk and SubDistrict, Periyakulam Registration District, Theni District and consequently forbear the respondents from in any manner proceeding against the said immovable agricultural properties of the petitioner by way of proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, 2002.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Arun Jeyatram

¶14

Central Government Standing Counsel

¶15

ORDER

¶16

[Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE]

¶17

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent secured creditor has purported to proceed against an agricultural land which is impermissible.

¶18

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

¶19

Page 1 of 2

¶20

W.P.(MD)No.25062 of 2016

¶21

2.Ordinarily, the writ court does not entertain a petition pertaining to a dispute between a defaulting borrower and the secured creditor since the the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 confers authority on the jurisdictional Debts Recovery Tribunal to take up such matters. There is no indication as to why this forum was required to be approached in preference to the regular forum of the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

¶22

3.Accordingly, W.P(MD)No.25062 of 2016 is dismissed and the petitioner is left free to pursue the petitioner's remedies in respect of the matters complained of before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.

¶23

W.M.P(MD)No.18137 of 2016 is closed. There will no order as to costs.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Assistant Registrar (Crl)

¶26

// True Copy //

¶27

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶28

PM/PJL

¶29

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned .

¶30

¶31

1.The Secretary to Government, Union of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi.

¶32

2.The Authorised Officer/Chief Manager, Indian Bank, Bodinayakanur,

¶33

Theni District.

¶34

+1 CC to M/s.P.PAULPANDI, Advocate ( SR-32533[F] dated 26/10/2021)

¶35

W.P.(MD) No.25062 of 2016 25.10.2021

¶36

RD/PM (02/11/2021) 2P 4C

¶37

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

¶38

Page 2 of 2

Mr.M.Vijayakumar, v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.M.Vijayakumar, v. the Union of India

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

Marutee Agro Foods Vs the Authorisied Officer

S.Shanmugam Vs the District Collector

Ajitha Vs the District Collector

A.Baskar Vs National Trust Housing

Mrs. v.Vinothini, Vs the Union of India

K.P.Ramachandan, S/O.Paul Vs the Branch Manager