https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337745 The writ challenge to SARFAESI measures was held not maintainable because the impugned section 13(4) notice had already been withdrawn, so that immediate grievance no longer survived. The Court also found that the petitioners had an efficacious statutory remedy under section 17 to raise all objections, including the mode of communication of the section 13(3A) reply through an advocate. In recovery matters of this kind, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be invoked when the statutory appellate mechanism is available. The petition was therefore dismissed, leaving the petitioners to pursue the section 17 remedy. en-us Thu, 12 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:15:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337745 The writ challenge to SARFAESI measures was held not maintainable because the impugned section 13(4) notice had already been withdrawn, so that immediate grievance no longer survived. The Court also found that the petitioners had an efficacious statutory remedy under section 17 to raise all objections, including the mode of communication of the section 13(3A) reply through an advocate. In recovery matters of this kind, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be invoked when the statutory appellate mechanism is available. The petition was therefore dismissed, leaving the petitioners to pursue the section 17 remedy. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 12 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337745