Jagdamba Liquified Steels ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 3053 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
               NAINITAL
            Writ Petition (M/S) No.2805 of 2023

Jagdamba Liquified Steels Limited                      ....Petitioner

                               Versus

State of Uttarakhand and Others                     ....Respondents

Present:-
            Mr. Akshay Pradhan, Advocate for the petitioner.
            Mr. K.K. Sah, Additional C.S.C. for the State.
            Mr. Ajay Singh Bisht, Advocate for the respondent no.2.

                            JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The challenge in this petition is made to an

order dated 05.09.2023, passed by the respondent no.1,

under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,

2002 ("the Act").

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. At the very outset, the Court wanted to know as

to why the petition should be entertained in view of adequate

efficacious relief under Section 17 of the Act? Learned counsel

for the petitioner would submit that the Court may decide the

matter in view of Section 17 of the Act.

4. The Act has been enacted to regulate

securitization and reconstruction of financial assets and

enforcement of security interest, etc. There is a complete

procedure given in it. Any order passed under Sections 13

and 14 of the Act may very well be challenged under Section

17 of the Act, in view of the law, as laid down by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the cases of C. Bright Vs. District Collector

and others, (2021) 2 SCC 392, Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. Vs.

Girnar Corrugators Private Ltd and Others, (2023) 3 SCC 210,

and Harshad Govardhan Sondagar Vs. International Assets

Reconstruction Company Limited and Others, (2014)6 SCC 1.

5. The petitioner has alternate efficacious remedy

by way of ventilating his grievance under Section 17 of the

Act. Therefore, the Court refrains to entertain the writ

petition. Accordingly, the petition deserves to be dismissed at

the stage of admission itself.

s

6. The writ petition is dismissed in limine.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 10.10.2023 Ravi Bisht