TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the writ petition was barred by the availability of an alternative statutory remedy under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and by alleged disputed questions of fact; (ii) Whether possession action under Section 13(4) could be sustained without prior disposal of the borrower's representations under Section 13(3A) of the Act.
Issue (i): Whether the writ petition was barred by the availability of an alternative statutory remedy under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and by alleged disputed questions of fact.
Analysis: Existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the exercise of writ jurisdiction, and the Court may entertain the petition where the impugned action is without jurisdiction. The Bank failed to demonstrate any real disputed question of fact warranting relegation to the statutory remedy. The Court therefore declined to non-suit the petitioner on the ground of alternate remedy.
Conclusion: This issue was decided in favour of the petitioner.
Issue (ii): Whether possession action under Section 13(4) could be sustained without prior disposal of the borrower's representations under Section 13(3A) of the Act.
Analysis: Disposal of the borrower's representation or objection under Section 13(3A) is a condition precedent to the taking of measures under Section 13(4). Such disposal forms part of the jurisdictional facts required before secured-creditor action can proceed. Since the possession notice was issued before the representations were duly disposed of, the action was held to suffer from gross jurisdictional error and the Bank was directed to reconsider the representations in accordance with law.
Conclusion: This issue was decided in favour of the petitioner.
Final Conclusion: The secured creditor's possession step was held unsustainable for want of prior consideration of the borrower's representations, and the Bank was directed to decide those representations afresh before proceeding further.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute makes disposal of the borrower's representation a precondition to coercive measures by the secured creditor, action taken before such disposal is jurisdictionally infirm and amenable to writ correction notwithstanding the availability of an alternate statutory remedy.
TaxTMI 
