2010 (2) TMI 1267 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
The judgment involves the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to challenge notices u/s 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, and the restoration of possession.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Challenge to Notice u/s 13(2) of SARFAESI Act
The Petitioner sought to quash a notice dated 8.6.2009 issued u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, contending that a previous notice dated 19.9.2003 had been objected to, thus precluding the Respondent from issuing a fresh notice. The Petitioner argued that the subsequent notice was time-barred and illegal. However, the Respondent/Bank asserted that there was no statutory prohibition for invoking u/s 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. The Court found merit in the Respondent's submissions, emphasizing that the Petitioner had a decree against them for a specific sum with interest and costs. The Court also noted that the Petitioner had invoked the SARFAESI Act by filing an appeal before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, rendering the writ petition redundant.

Issue 2: Legality of Issuing Subsequent Notice
The Court deliberated on whether the Respondent/Bank could issue a notice u/s 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act both in 2003 and 2009. It was observed that the Petitioner's objections in 2003 did not preclude the subsequent notice in 2009, especially considering the ongoing legal proceedings and the disposal of the Petitioner's Counter Claim and the Respondent's O.A. The Court differentiated this case from precedent where objections were not considered in subsequent notices. Ultimately, the Court found no merit in the Petitioner's contentions and dismissed the writ petition without costs.

This judgment clarifies the legal standing regarding challenging notices under the SARFAESI Act and highlights the importance of pursuing available legal remedies in such cases.