Mukta Gupta, J.

1. Copy of the impugned order dated 29th May, 2015 has not been filed. However, learned counsel for the appellant has handed over the same to the Court which is taken on record.

2. The grievance of the appellant to the impugned order dated 29th May, 2015 is that the learned Single Judge of this Court in CS (OS) No. 4095/2014 held that the suit was not maintainable. In the suit, the appellant challenged the measures taken by respondent No. 1 Axis Bank Ltd. (hereinafter called “the bank”) under Section 13 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (for short ‘SARFAESI’) Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).

3. Learned Single Judge dismissed the suit on the objections of the respondents regarding the maintainability of the suit in view of the remedy available under Section 17 of the Act. By the impugned order the following observations were made:-

24. From the aforesaid, the following legal propositions emerge propos the maintainability of a suit on the ground of fraud:

a. The exception carved out by the Supreme Court in Mardia Chemicals (supra) is a very limited exception. Like all exceptions, it