9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 756X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... controversy and the subject matter. It would be entirely appropriate that the petitioner approaches the Tribunal to agitate his rights by filing appropriate application in the said proceedings. In any view, therefore, the petitioner has to get his rights agitated by approaching the Tribunal which is a statutory remedy available. In the aforesaid view, present petition is not entertained and dismissed, leaving the petitioner at liberty to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal. It goes without saying that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case of the petitioner. - SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15384 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 9-2-2016 - MR. N.V.ANJARIA, J. FOR THE PETITIONER : MR DIPEN C SHAH, ADVOCATE ORAL ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner in paragraph 4 that respondent No.2 had already initiated proceedings under Section 17 of the SERFAESI Act by preferring Securitisation Appeal No.122 of 2015 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Ahmedabad. The petitioner had produced Memorandum of Appeal as well as copy of notice dated 06th August, 2015 issued by the Tribunal. 4. Notice for possession was pasted at the premises of the petitioner on 22nd July, 2015 on the basis of the order of the Collector under Section 14 of the Act. The submissions against impugned action, as highlighted and elaborated by learned advocate for the petitioner, are inter alia that no security interest has been created by the predecessor-in-title of the petitioner, therefore, the SERFAESI Act is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Supreme Court has stated that the measures under Section 14 constitutes the action taken after the stage of Section 13(4) and a remedy of appeal under Section 17 would be available. In that case, refusal by the High Court to entertain the writ petition was held to be fully justified. 7. Reliance placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in Harshad Govardhan Sondagar Vs International Assets Reconstruction Company Limited [(2014) 6 SCC 1] by learned advocate for the petitioner was not well placed in asmuch as the said judgment was in different context regarding rights of a person having tenantable or leasehold interest in the property subjected to recovery of dues from the borrower by the Bank. The said decision would not readily apply ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recovery of the public dues, etc., the High Court must keep in mind that the legislations enacted by Parliament and State Legislatures for recovery of such dues are code unto themselves inasmuch as they not only contain comprehensive procedure for recovery of the dues but also envisage constitution of quasi judicial bodies for redressal of the grievance of any aggrieved person. Therefore, in all such cases, High Court must insist that before availing remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution, a person must exhaust the remedies available under the relevant statute. 8.1 Sounding caution, the Supreme Court observed further thus, ...despite repeated pronouncement of this Court, the High Courts continue to ignore the availability of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
