9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 for recovery of the amount. A notice under section 13(2) as well as notice under a section 13(4) taking symbolic possession of the secured assets were issued. The stage reached was an application by the bank under section 14 of the Act before the District Magistrate seeking to recover the physical possession of the property, since the petitioner company did not comply with the instructions nor paid up the amount. 2.1 The District Magistrate by order dated 02.03.2016 granted application of the bank under section 14 of the Act rendering assistance for recovery of possession of the secured assets. It is this order which is called in question in the present writ petition. 3. The petition was filed in Ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dev Vs State of Maharashtra [(2011) 2 SCC 782] the Supreme Court upheld the order of the High Court in not entertaining the petition and relegating the petitioner to the said remedy. In Union Bank of India Vs Satyavati Tondon [(2010) 8 SCC 110] the Apex Court observed thus, the High Court overlooked the settled law that the High Court will ordinarily not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective remedy is available to the aggrieved person and that this rule applies with greater rigour in matters involving recovery of taxes, cess, fees, other types of public money and the dues of banks and other financial institutions. In our view, while dealing with the petitions involving challenge to the action taken for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, it is already availed of. 6. It is trite that in the matters involving commercial disputes, the rule of availing alternative statutory remedy has to be adhered to steadfast. 6.1 It may not be out of place to mention while parting with that during the pendency of section 14 proceedings before the District Magistrate, the present petitioner had moved Special Civil Application No. 2295 of 2016 on the ground that all the conditions required under section 14(2) were not complied with. The said petition was dismissed with costs, extracting the relevant paragraphs as under, "6. In addition to above, most pertinently, it emerged as an admitted position in course of hearing that the petitioner has already approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
