Statutory appeal remedy prevails over parallel SARFAESI proceedings when challenging a Recovery Officer's order and sale process.

Where a specific statutory appeal lies against a Recovery Officer's order under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, the aggrieved borrower must pursue that remedy and cannot invoke pending SARFAESI proceedings to challenge the order or restrain the sale process. The two recovery regimes operate separately and distinctly, so an interim application in SARFAESI proceedings cannot be used to bypass the prescribed appeal under section 30. On that basis, the Tribunal's interference with the Recovery Officer's process was held unsustainable and the relief granted to the borrowers was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the borrowers could challenge the Recovery Officer's order by an interim application in pending SARFAESI proceedings despite the statutory appeal remedy under section 30 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, and whether the Tribunal could stay the Recovery Officer's sale proclamation in such proceedings.

Analysis: The appeal arose from parallel recovery steps taken under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993. The borrowers, instead of availing the appeal provided against an order of the Recovery Officer, invoked the pending SARFAESI securitization application to assail that order and seek restraint on sale proceedings. The governing scheme treats the two recovery mechanisms as separate and distinct, and the statutory appeal under section 30 of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 was the proper remedy against the Recovery Officer's order. Entertaining the application in SARFAESI proceedings amounted to proceeding under the wrong statutory regime and could not sustain a direction affecting the Recovery Officer's process.

Conclusion: The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to entertain the borrowers' application in the SARFAESI proceedings against the Recovery Officer's order, and the impugned order was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The order granting relief to the borrowers was set aside and the bank's challenge succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a specific statutory appeal lies against an order of the Recovery Officer, the aggrieved party must pursue that remedy and cannot invoke parallel SARFAESI proceedings to restrain or nullify the recovery process.

---