The SARFAESI Act is applicable to agricultural land offered as security, and the petitioner's remedy lies under Section 17 of the Act.

A.S. BOPANNA, J.

1. Heard Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is before this Court assailing the notice dated 4.10.2018 (Annexure-8 to the petition). The son of the petitioner had secured a loan from the Respondent Bank to which the petitioner subscribed his signature as guarantor. In that regard, the properties referred to in the impugned communication dated 4.10.2018 is offered as security. Since the loan secured from the Bank was treated as NPA, further proceedings under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short hereinafter referred to as ‘SARFAESI Act’) was initiated. It is in that view, presently the communication dated 4.10.2018 is issued.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the notice would contend that no other further proceedings prior to the instant proceeding has been initiated except one under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act. It is further contended that the property offered as security is an agricultural land and, as such, the provision of the SARFAESI Act ought not to be made applicable. In that circumstance, no doubt, even if the applicability of the SARFAESI Act is raised as a question, the details of the land offered as security and the manner in which action has been taken by the respondent Bank can be assailed by the petitioner in an appropriate proceeding. In that regard, the very impugned communication dated 4.10.2018 would indicate that the respondent Bank having proceeded further have also initiated action under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act and had obtained an order from the Deputy Commissioner dated 23.4.2018 to enable them to take possession of the secured asset. It is, in that light, the impugned communication has been issued intimating the petitioner the proposed action to take physical possession of the property. It is, in that view, an order has been passed Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act dated 23.4.2018. Appropriate course of action available to the petitioner is to avail remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act.

4. Hence, we do not find any reason to entertain the petition further. But the petitioner is reserved with the liberty of filing such appeal and if the appeal is belated, and an appropriate application seeking condonation of delay is filed, the Debts Recovery Tribunal would consider the same so as to adjudicate the merit of the rival claims of the parties.

In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed of.