https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326319 An order passed under section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, after compliance with sections 13(2) and 13(4), was held not to be amenable to revisional jurisdiction under section 397 CrPC because section 14(3) gives finality to the act done under that provision and the proceeding is not a criminal proceeding for section 397 purposes. The Court also noted that a statutory finality clause does not exclude constitutional review under Articles 226 and 227, but no patent error or illegality in the Magistrate's order was shown. Revision was therefore not maintainable, and no ground for writ interference was made out. en-us Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Apr 2016 09:57:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326319 An order passed under section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, after compliance with sections 13(2) and 13(4), was held not to be amenable to revisional jurisdiction under section 397 CrPC because section 14(3) gives finality to the act done under that provision and the proceeding is not a criminal proceeding for section 397 purposes. The Court also noted that a statutory finality clause does not exclude constitutional review under Articles 226 and 227, but no patent error or illegality in the Magistrate's order was shown. Revision was therefore not maintainable, and no ground for writ interference was made out. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 29 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326319