https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384299 The judgment emphasizes that High Courts should not entertain petitions under Article 226 if an effective statutory remedy is available. It criticizes the trend of ignoring statutory remedies under the SARFAESI Act and the DRT Act, stressing the importance of exhausting alternative remedies. The court warns against granting ex parte interim orders in financial matters, highlighting the adverse impact on public projects and financial institutions. The judgment dismisses the writ petition, allowing the petitioner to appeal against the Order-in-Original within a specified period, emphasizing adherence to legal procedures in financial matters. en-us Tue, 30 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Aug 2019 11:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384299 The judgment emphasizes that High Courts should not entertain petitions under Article 226 if an effective statutory remedy is available. It criticizes the trend of ignoring statutory remedies under the SARFAESI Act and the DRT Act, stressing the importance of exhausting alternative remedies. The court warns against granting ex parte interim orders in financial matters, highlighting the adverse impact on public projects and financial institutions. The judgment dismisses the writ petition, allowing the petitioner to appeal against the Order-in-Original within a specified period, emphasizing adherence to legal procedures in financial matters. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 30 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384299