Sri. D. Ramesh vs Union Bank Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 2443 Tel

       THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

                                 AND

       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR


                WRIT PETITION No.25830 of 2023


ORDER: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Alok Aradhe)


        Ms. P.Hamsa Durga, learned counsel for the petitioner.


        2.   Heard on the question of admission.


        3.   In this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed

the validity of the order dated 23.03.2023 passed in

Crl.M.P.No.18      of   2023     by        Chief   Judicial   Magistrate,

Hanumakonda.


        4.   Admittedly, against the aforesaid order an appeal

lies    under    Section    17        of     the    Securitisation   and

Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, 2002 (briefly referred to hereinafter as

"the SARFAESI Act") in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble
                                      ::2::


Supreme Court in Bajarang Shyamsunder Agarwal v.

Central Bank of India and another 1.


       5.     Hon'ble Supreme Court in United Bank of India

v. Satyawati Tondon 2 has deprecated the practice of the

High Courts in entertaining the writ petitions despite

availability of an alternative remedy. The aforesaid view has

also   been     reiterated      by     Hon'ble       Supreme        Court   in

Varimadugu Obi Reddy v. B.Sreenivasulu 3.                      The relevant

extract of para 36 reads as under:


                      "36.   In the instant case, although the
              respondent borrowers initially approached the

Debts Recovery Tribunal by filing an application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, but the order of the Tribunal indeed was appealable under Section 18 of the Act subject to the compliance of condition of pre-deposit and without exhausting the statutory remedy of appeal, the respondent borrowers approached the High Court by filing the writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution. We deprecate such practice of entertaining the writ application by the High Court in exercise of jurisdiction under

1 (2019) 9 SCC 94 2 (2010) 8 SCC 110 3 (2023) 2 SCC 168 ::3::

Article 226 of the Constitution without exhausting the alternative statutory remedy available under the law. This circuitous route appears to have been adopted to avoid the condition of pre-deposit contemplated under 2nd proviso to Section 18 of the 2002 Act"

6. In view of aforesaid enunciation of law by Hon'ble

Supreme Court, we are not inclined to entertain the writ

petition. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take

recourse to the remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI

Act.

7. With the aforesaid liberty, the Writ Petition is

disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any,

in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

_______________________________ ALOK ARADHE, CJ

_______________________________ N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR, J Date: 15.09.2023

KL