SARFAESI civil suit bar: disputes over Section 13(4) measures must be pursued before statutory tribunals, not civil court.

When SARFAESI proceedings are initiated, a civil suit styled as a partition action cannot be used to obstruct measures taken under Section 13(4) if the dispute falls within matters the DRT or DRAT can determine. Section 34 bars civil court jurisdiction over such issues, and Section 35 gives the Act overriding effect over inconsistent laws. The aggrieved party must therefore pursue the statutory remedies under Sections 17 and 18 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and, if necessary, the Appellate Tribunal. The note records that the civil suits were closed, the auction sale was maintained, and objections were left to be raised before the tribunal.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a suit for partition was maintainable notwithstanding Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 when proceedings under the Act had been initiated; (ii) whether the aggrieved party was required to pursue the remedies under Sections 17 and 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 instead of approaching the civil court.

Issue (i): Whether a suit for partition was maintainable notwithstanding Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 when proceedings under the Act had been initiated.

Analysis: The bar under Section 34 extends to matters which the Debts Recovery Tribunal or the Appellate Tribunal is empowered to determine. Where the dispute concerns measures taken under Section 13(4), the civil court cannot entertain a suit in respect of those matters. The existence of a suit styled as one for partition does not by itself exclude the statutory bar when the effect of the suit is to obstruct enforcement under the SARFAESI Act.

Conclusion: The suit was not maintainable and the civil court lacked jurisdiction.

Issue (ii): Whether the aggrieved party was required to pursue the remedies under Sections 17 and 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 instead of approaching the civil court.

Analysis: The statutory scheme provides an efficacious and adequate remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 and, if necessary, the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal under Section 18. Section 35 gives the SARFAESI Act overriding effect over inconsistent laws, reinforcing the exclusion of civil court jurisdiction in such matters.

Conclusion: The aggrieved party was bound to avail the remedies under Sections 17 and 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.

Final Conclusion: The civil suits were closed, the auction sale was maintained, and the matter was left to be pursued before the Debts Recovery Tribunal with liberty to raise all available objections.

Ratio Decidendi: When proceedings under the SARFAESI Act are initiated, disputes relating to measures under Section 13(4) must be pursued before the statutory tribunals and not through a civil suit, because Section 34 bars civil court jurisdiction and Sections 17 and 18 provide the exclusive efficacious remedy.

---