The Madras High Court recently reaffirmed the law’s stance and rejected the petitioner’s writ since the alternate appellate remedy provided by Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act was not used. The matter was between R. Ganesan v. M/s. ASREC (India) Limited (W.P.No.27644 of 2021 W.M.P.Nos.29183 & 29185 of 2021) and was presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice M. Duraiswamy and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sathya Narayan Prasad.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
In order to challenge the order made in accordance with Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, the Petitioner filed a writ petition with the Madras High Court pursuant to Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. He also requested the issuance of a writ of certified mandamus to request the records pertaining to the proceedings of the CJM, Tirappur District, invalidate those proceedings, and subsequently order the Respondent to deseal the premises. The CMM or DM has the authority to help the secured creditor take possession of the secured asset under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.
As noted by the Hon’ble Court In accordance with Section 17’s provisions, a Debt Recovery Tribunal appeal may be lodged within 45 days after the date when the actions referred to in Section 13(4) of the Act are taken.
The Bench held that the aggrieved parties cannot challenge proceedings taking place under the SARFAESI Act directly by way of a Writ Petition under Article 226 without exhausting the remedy of appeal available to them. The Bench relied on decisions by the Supreme Court in The Authorized Officer, State Bank of Travancore and another Vs. Mathew K.C. and Agarwal Tracom Private Limited Vs. Punjab National Bank and others.
The petition was denied by the court, who also stated that the petitioner was free to appeal the contested ruling before the Debt Recovery Tribunal in accordance with Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGMENT REVIEWED BY ADITI PRIYADARSHI