VIKAS KUCHERIA Vs. IDBI BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. O.P. Bhati, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S. Dutta, the learned Counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2 as well as Mr. A. Das, the learned Counsel for the respondent No.3.

(2.) At the outset, the learned Counsels appearing for the respondents has raised the issue of maintainability of both the present revisions on the ground that against the orders passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati (DRT for short), there exists an alternative and efficacious remedy available to the petitioners by filing an appeal as provided in Section 18 of the Securitization And Reconstruction of Financial Assets And Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ("SARFAESI Act" for short). Hence, instead of entertaining the present revision, the petitioners may be directed to move the appellate forum. Thus, this Court had heard the learned Counsels for the parties on the preliminary issue raised by the respondents.

(3.) The brief introductory case of the parties is that the respondents No.1 and 2, i.e. IDBI Bank Ltd. and its Authorized Officer had taken steps under the Securitisation And Reconstruction of Financial Assets And Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ("SARFAESI Act" for short), against the petitioners for enforcing recovery of a sum of Rs.4,19,10,110.88 (Rupees Four Crore nineteen lakh ten thousand one hundred ten and paise eighty eight only) as on 01.08.2016, as appears from the sale notice published in the newspapers.