https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335608 A writ petition under Article 226 challenging SARFAESI recovery measures taken after Section 13(4) was declined because an efficacious statutory appeal was available under Section 17. The Court applied the settled alternative remedy principle, holding that where the Act provides a direct appeal to the Debts Recovery Tribunal against such measures, the aggrieved party must first pursue that forum. In recovery matters, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be invoked when the statutory mechanism can address the grievance. The petitioners were therefore relegated to the remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. en-us Wed, 30 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Dec 2016 09:56:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335608 A writ petition under Article 226 challenging SARFAESI recovery measures taken after Section 13(4) was declined because an efficacious statutory appeal was available under Section 17. The Court applied the settled alternative remedy principle, holding that where the Act provides a direct appeal to the Debts Recovery Tribunal against such measures, the aggrieved party must first pursue that forum. In recovery matters, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be invoked when the statutory mechanism can address the grievance. The petitioners were therefore relegated to the remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 30 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335608