BANK OF BARODA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter is referred by the Division Bench of this High Court which was hearing this writ petition with a request to Hon'ble The Chief Justice to constitute a larger Bench to decide the following questions :-

(2.) The factual matrix of the matter is that the Hon'ble Division Bench while deciding W.A. No. 489/2016 (India Sem Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. Vs. State of M.P. and others) decided on 21st day of December, 2017 were dealing with the order passed in W.P. No. 6131/2016 by which the learned Writ Court relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in KanhaiyaLal Lalchand Sachdev and others Vs. State of Maharashtra and others (2011) 2 SCC 782 held that an action under Sec. 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (In short 'SARFAESI Act') constitutes an action taken after the stage of Sec. 13 (4) and, therefore, the same would fall within the ambit of Sec. 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act and dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable with liberty to the petitioner Financial institution to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Sec. 17 of the SARFAESI Act.

(3.) While deciding the writ appeal and taking into consideration the law laid down by the five Judges Bench of this High Court in the case of Jabalpur Bus Operators Association and others Vs. State of M.P. and another (2003) 1 MPLJ 513, so also taking into consideration that the judgment of United Bank of India Vs. Satyawati Tondon (2010) 8 SCC 110, Jagdish Singh Vs. Heeralal and others (2014) 1 SCC 479 were not considered while upholding the view taken in the matter of M/s Sri Ambika Solvex Ltd. Vs. State Bank of India & others 2016 SCC Online MP 5772, held that they would like to follow the earlier judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court where the question of maintainability of the writ petition was considered in great detail and held that appellant has an effective alternate remedy to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Sec. 17 of the SARFAESI Act and accordingly held that the writ appeal filed by the appellant/creditor India Sem Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. has no merit and it accordingly dismissed the writ appeal with liberty to the appellant to avail the remedy of appeal under Sec. 17 of the SARFAESI Act in accordance with law.