VIJAY LAGHU UDYOG Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two writ petitions namely, Writ Petition No. 119 (M/B) of 2004 and Writ Petition No. 120 (M/B) of 2004, since the question of fact and law is the same, we decide the matter by passing a common order.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents Shri Sharad Bhatnagar appearing for the bank raises a preliminary objection, against the maintainability of the present writ petition on the ground that under the provision of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Act No. 54 of 2002) (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the petitioner is not entitled to challenge any action initiated under Section 13 unless measures have been taken under Section 13(4) of the Act. The submission is that the appeal under Section 17 would lie only against the measures taken under Section 13(4) of the Act and not otherwise. As a consequence of the scheme of the Act, it is being urged that the petitioners would not be allowed to obstruct the action which is taken under the provision of the aforesaid Act, by allowing them to challenge the action step-by-step, by filing a writ petition at intermittent stages, when the Act itself does not envisage any such remedy being provided to the defaulter and the only statutory remedy which has been provided can be availed under Section 17 in the manner provided therein.