A.VIJAYAKUMA Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the 1st respondent dtd. 26/6/2019 under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [SARFAESI Act] and quash the same.

(2.) The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the District Collector, Namakkal, dtd. 26/6/2019 under Sec. 14 of the SARFAESI Act. Admittedly, the petitioner is a borrower and has challenged the order passed by the 1st respondent after a lapse of three years. The petitioner has not explained the reason for laches in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition. That apart, when the petitioner has got remedy by way of filing an appeal under Sec. 17 of the SARFAESI Act, the Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable.

(3.) The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the following judgments held that remedy open to the aggrieved party in respect of the proceedings initiated under the under the SARFAESI Act is to file an appeal under Sec. 17 of the SARFAESI Act and not under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that Writ Petition field under Article 226 of the Constitution of India under the SARFAESI Act is not maintainable.