AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This writ petition is filed by the petitioners aggrieved by the
proceeding initiated against them for recovery of outstanding dues
by the respondent-ICICI Bank("Bank"). The petitioners have also
questioned validity of notice issued by the respondent-Bank under
Section 13(4) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial
Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short
"the Act") for taking possession of the secured assets.
Indisputably, the petitioners are aggrieved by the measures
adopted by the respondent-Bank for enforcement of the security interest in terms of sub-section (4) of Section 13 of the Act.
Against the measures adopted by the secured creditor under
Section 13(4) of the Act, a remedy of appeal is available to the petitioners u/s 17 of the Act. As per provisions of sub-section (3)
of Section 17, if the Debt Recovery Tribunal after examining the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence produced by the parties comes to the conclusion that any measures referred to in sub-section (4) of Section 13 by the secured creditor are not in accordance with the provisions of the Act or the Rules made thereunder then, it can declare the recourse to any one or more measures referred to in sub-section (4) of Section 13 taken by the secured creditor as invalid and restore the possession of the secured assets to the borrower. Thus, in view of availability of effective & efficacious remedy to the petitioners against the
impugned action under the relevant statute, there is absolutely no
reason, why the petitioners should be permitted to invoke extra ordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed in limine.