The High Court held the writ petition challenging a notice of sale of assets by the Bank not maintainable as an efficacious remedy was pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.
The writ petition was dismissed with 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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
WRIT PETITION No.3885 of 2014
ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Ashutosh Mohunta)
This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the notice of sale of secured assets dt.07.01.2014 issued by the
1st respondent–Bank whereby the petitioner has been directed to make payment of Rs.7,19,74,987.03 paise, otherwise the secured assets would be sold in an auction to be conducted on 12.02.2014.
The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has already filed an I.A. before the Debt Recovery Tribunal for setting aside the ex parte decree dt.23.07.2013 in O.A.No.418 of 2012, however, the same has not been disposed of.
After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, we are of the considered opinion that the present writ petition is not maintainable as the I.A. filed by the petitioner is still pending with the Debt Recovery Tribunal and the petitioner may file an appropriate application for disposal of the said I.A. or for stay of further proceedings, which shall be dealt with, in accordance with law, by the 2nd respondent. When efficacious remedy is already available to the petitioner, this Court cannot exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, we find no grounds in the writ petition.
The Writ Petition is dismissed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed.
__________________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J
__________________________________ M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J
11th February, 2014. gra
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY
CONTEMPT CASE No.1573 of 2013
Date : 06-02-2014
Rds
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the notice of sale of secured assets is maintainable when an efficacious remedy is pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Bank (1st Respondent)
Debt Recovery Tribunal (2nd Respondent)
Ashutosh Mohunta
M. Satyanarayana Murthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
