KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED Vs. TWADANYA AGARWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been directed by the petitioner Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited assailing order dated August 03, 2016 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) 2nd Court, Alipore in Title Suit No. 19 of 2015 (Twadanya Agarwal Vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited & Another) by which the application filed on June 14, 2016 by the petitioner as defendant in said suit under Order VII Rule 11(D) of the Code of Civil Procedure with the prayer that the plaint would be rejected as it was barred by the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (shortly to be called as SARFAESI Act).

(2.) Though learned Counsels of both sides argued on merit with aspiring to have intended order from the High Court by disposal of this matter on merit, but this Court may have some reservation by refraining from doing so.

(3.) It is obvious that the special or extraordinary remedy by invoking revisional jurisdiction is not supposed to be exercised by this Court, unless it is a last resource for any aggrieved litigant in the State, or alternatively, there is no other efficacious remedy opened to such aggrieved person except moving before the High Court under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India.