Smt Sunitha Taank Or Sunitha Das vs State Bank Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 2603 Tel

      HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
                       AND
           HON'BLE JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI

               Writ Petition No.22299 OF 2021

JUDGMENT:(per Hon'ble Sri Justice A.Rajasheker Reddy)

     Heard Sri K.V.L.Jayasimha, learned counsel for the

petitioner    and    Sri   Jadhav,   learned    Standing   Counsel

representing Pearl Law Associates for the respondent Bank.

Learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Bank

submits that against the impugned proceedings the

petitioner also filed writ petition in respect of the same loan

transaction and that the petitioner has alternate remedy

under the provisions of Securitization and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,

2002 (For short 'the Act of 2002').

Learned counsel for the petitioner could not dispute the

fact that the petitioner has alternate remedy against

impugned proceedings.

In view of above facts and circumstances, we do not

see any reason to entertain the writ petition and no

extraordinary circumstances are brought to the notice of this

Court for entertaining the writ petition bypassing the

alternate remedy.

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of granting

liberty to the petitioner to avail alternate remedy available

to him under law.

There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto,

miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition,

shall stand closed.

_________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J

______________ G. SRI DEVI, J Date:15.09.2021 tk/kvs HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY AND HON'BLE JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI

Writ Petition No.22299 OF 2021

Date: 15.09.2021

tk/kvs