Civil Court jurisdiction barred under SARFAESI where pleadings showed the secured asset was separate property and DRT remedy applied.

Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act bars Civil Court jurisdiction where the dispute concerns measures taken under section 13(4) and the Debts Recovery Tribunal is empowered to grant relief, while section 17(1) provides a remedy to any aggrieved person, not only the borrower. On the pleadings, the plaintiffs' own case of a prior partition showed that the secured asset was the father's separate property rather than joint family property, so their consent was not required for mortgage or enforcement. The Civil Court therefore had no jurisdiction, and any remedy lay before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under section 17.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Civil Court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit challenging measures taken by the secured creditor under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, when the plaintiffs claimed co-parcenary rights in the secured asset.

Analysis: Section 34 of the Act bars Civil Court jurisdiction in respect of matters which the Debts Recovery Tribunal is empowered to determine, while section 17(1) provides a remedy to any person aggrieved by measures taken under section 13(4). The expression "any person" is of wide amplitude and is not confined to the borrower alone. Although Civil Court jurisdiction may survive in very limited cases, the plaint itself showed that the plaintiffs pleaded a prior partition between their father and grandfather, from which the father's share had become his separate property. On those pleadings, the suit property could not be treated as joint family property requiring the plaintiffs' consent for mortgage or enforcement proceedings.

Conclusion: The Civil Court had no jurisdiction. The remedy, if any, lay before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under section 17 of the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the pleadings themselves show that the secured asset is not joint family property and the grievance is against measures taken under section 13(4), Civil Court jurisdiction is barred by section 34 and the aggrieved persons must pursue the statutory remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under section 17.

---