APURBA DEV SARMA Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, KAMRUP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following relief:-

(2.) This writ petition came up for consideration before this Court for the first time on 19/2/2025, when this Court, after hearing the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, opined that the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Sec. 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter to be referred as the "SARFAESI Act") against the measures taken by the respondent bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.

(3.) At that time, Mr. D. Das, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is not covered under the expression "any person" used in Sec. 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act and, therefore, he cannot avail the remedy of approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Sec. 17 of the SARFAESI Act. In the alternative, Mr. Das also submitted that the remedy under Sec. 17 is not an efficacious remedy and, therefore, the only remedy available with the petitioner is to approach this Court by way of filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Mr. Das also argued that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the provisions of the SAR-FAESI Act has no application in the case of the petitioner and on this ground also the matter requires consideration by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.