9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MR PRANAV G DESAI, ADVOCATE Heard learned advocate Mr. D. P. Kinariwala for the petitioners, Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Divyangna Jhala for respondent No.1 and learned advocate Mr. Pranav G. Desai for respondent No.2. 2. The challenge in the present petition is directed against order dated 18th June, 2015, passed by the Mamlatdar & Executive Magistrate, which is the order for taki ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mount then due as on 25th March, 2013 of Rs. 91,63,964/- with interest running. 3.1 It is not in dispute that the second respondent has already taken symbolic possession on 4th June, 2013 of the mortgaged property being Bungalow at Survey No. 28/3+4, Town Planing Scheme 15, Final Plot No. 24 and 25. The Bank-the second respondent thereupon moved under section 14 of the Act for taking physical pos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Act. The petitioners have to be relegated to the said alternative remedy, where all the contentions are kept open to be canvassed by the petitioners, as may be permissible in law. 5.1 In United Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tondon and Others [ (2010) 8 SCC 110], the Supreme Court observed thus, "the High Court overlooked the settled law that the High Court will ordinarily not entertain a petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t insist that before availing remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution, a person must exhaust the remedies available under the relevant statute." 5.2 Sounding caution, the Supreme Court observed further thus, "...despite repeated pronouncement of this Court, the High Courts continue to ignore the availability of statutory remedies under the DRT Act and SARFAESI Act and exercise jurisdiction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal by way of appeal under Section 17 of the Act. 6.1 As the time limit for preferring appeal under section 17 of the Act is 45 days, an apprehension was expressed by learned advocate for the petitioners that the appeal may be treated as barred by delay by the Tribunal. In this regard, it is observed that the petitioners are not precluded from pleading and raising as a ground for explanation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
