1. This is a suit challenging the measures taken by defendant No. 1 (hereafter “Bank”) under Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (for short “SARFAESI”) Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).

2. On 21.4.2015, after summons were issued, the Bank took a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the suit on the ground that the appropriate remedy available to the plaintiffs is under Section 17 of the Act and that it was always open to the plaintiffs to have approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal (for short “DRT”) concerned for the reliefs sought in the present suit. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the parties were heard on the issue of maintainability of the suit.

Contentions

3. Mr. Ashwini Mata, the learned Senior Advocate for the Bank submits that the suit is not maintainable since: (i) Section 34 of the Act specifically bars the jurisdiction of a civil court, (ii) the appropriate remedy is to file an application before the DRT under Section 17 of the Act, (iii) the suit is nothing but an endeavour to block the process of recovery initiated by the Bank under the Act; (iv) that OA No.4