Writ restraint in SARFAESI recovery matters limits interim stays where an effective statutory remedy is available.

Writ interference in SARFAESI recovery proceedings is ordinarily unwarranted where an effective statutory alternate remedy exists, and interim protection that stalls recovery should not be granted casually because it may prejudice secured creditors and public funds. Applying these settled principles, the text notes that no exceptional circumstance justified continuing the writ court's interim stay, and the stay of recovery proceedings was vacated.

---

---

Issues: Whether the interim order granting and continuing stay of recovery proceedings under the SARFAESI regime in a writ petition could be sustained in view of the availability of an alternate statutory remedy and the settled limits on writ interference in financial recovery matters.

Analysis: The Court noted the settled position that writ interference in proceedings under the SARFAESI Act is ordinarily unwarranted when an effective alternate remedy exists. It further observed that grant of interim protection in financial recovery matters can seriously prejudice secured creditors and public funds, and that such orders should not be passed casually or without compelling legal basis. Applying the binding principles relied upon from the Supreme Court, the Court found no justification to continue the interim stay granted by the writ court.

Conclusion: The interim order and its extension were vacated, and the writ appeal was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory alternate remedy exists and no exceptional circumstance is shown, the High Court should ordinarily refrain from granting or continuing interim relief that stalls SARFAESI recovery proceedings in exercise of writ jurisdiction.

---