Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.

1. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants, who challenge the judgment of the learned single Judge dismissing their writ petition. We have also heard the learned counsel for the respondent Bank.

2. The fact that the appellants availed a loan facility is not in dispute. Alleging default and outstanding, the Bank invoked the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and took measure to proceed thereunder. The debtors came to this Court when they faced a situation where the Bank did not accede to their contention that the lands covered by the security cannot be proceeded against under the SARFAESI Act because those lands are agricultural lands exempted from the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, in particular, Section 31(i) thereof. The learned single Judge refused to interfere at the instance of the debtors relying on the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court of India in United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tandon [(2010) 8 SCC 110], wherein entertainment of petitions in writ jurisdiction in relation to matters under the SARFAESI Act was held a