Statutory remedy under SARFAESI must be used before invoking Article 227 against possession proceedings.

Article 227 could not be invoked directly against a Magistrate's order in SARFAESI possession proceedings where an efficacious statutory remedy lay before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 after measures under Section 13(4). The court treated the revision as an attempt to bypass the statutory mechanism, noted that proceedings had arisen after notice under Section 13(2) and a request for possession under Section 14, and found no merit on the facts presented. The revision petition was therefore held not maintainable and dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revision petition was maintainable under Article 227 of the Constitution of India without first availing the statutory remedy under Section 17 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

Analysis: The petition arose from proceedings under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, after notice under Section 13(2) had been issued and the secured creditor sought possession of the secured asset. The Court noted that the borrower had an efficacious statutory remedy before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17, which becomes available once measures under Section 13(4) are taken. In this background, invocation of Article 227 directly against the order of the Magistrate was treated as an attempt to bypass the statutory mechanism. The Court also found no merit in the challenge on the facts placed before it.

Conclusion: The revision petition was not maintainable in the circumstances and was dismissed against the petitioner.

---