M. Jagannadha Rao, CJ. (ORAL)

( 1 ) THIS is a Letters Patent Appeal preferred against the order passed by the learned single Judge in a writ petition whereby the learned Judge refused to entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inasmuch as the appellant had an alternative remedy by way of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal constituted under the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (Act 51 of 1993 ). In the writ petition, the petitioner sought to challenge an order passed by the Tribunal constituted under the abovesaid Act, refusing amendment of the written statement under Order 6 Rule 17, Civil Procedure Code.

( 2 ) THE learned Judge held that inasmuch as an effective alternative remedy was available under the Act, he was not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Against this order, the present appeal has been preferred. Section 17 of the Act reads as follows:-

"17. Jurisdiction, powers and authority of Tribunals.

(1) A Tribunal shall exercise, on and from the appointed day, the jurisdiction, powers and authority to entertain and decide applications from the banks and financial institutions for recovery of debts d

Click Here to Read the rest of this document