JUDGMENT :

This Original Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India calls into question Ext.P6 order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal – 1, Ernakulam in I.A.No.1702 of 2022 in S.A.No.398 of 2022.

2. The facts of the case (to the extent necessary to adjudicate the issues raised), in brief, are that the petitioner availed a loan for business purposes from the respondent Bank. Among the items of the property, which were mortgaged for securing the repayment of the loan, was a property having an extent of approximately 44.60 cents. It is the case of the petitioner that the said property is agricultural land, against which proceedings cannot be initiated under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. It is the case of the petitioner that the Tribunal wrongly relied upon an undertaking stated to have been obtained from the petitioner at the time of sanction of the loan that the property in question is non-agricultural land. It is submitted that the application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner as well as the application for stay of proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, has been rejected by the Tribunal relying on the undertaking which is on record in this case as Ext.R1(b