Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(KER) 10830
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Nitin Jamdar, CJ, S.MANU, J
MUHSINA N. – Appellant
Versus
THE BRANCH MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK, KADAKAL BRANCH – Respondent
WA 656/2025
Affected parties must approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal under SARFAESI Act.
Headnote:The Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) provides that affected parties must approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal for remedies against actions taken by secured creditors. The court reiterated this position, referencing Supreme Court decisions, and declined to interfere with the lower court's judgment, allowing the appellant to pursue remedies at the Tribunal. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's analysis on sarfaesi act (Para 2) |
Heard Mr.E.D.George, learned counsel for the Appellant and Mr.Paulochan Antony, learned counsel for the Respondents.
2. As against the action taken by the secured creditor under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act , 2002 (SARFAESI Act), it is more than settled that the remedy of the affected parties is to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal. This position of law has been reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon , [1[ 2010 (8) SCC 110 ]] , PHR Invent Educational Society v. UCO Bank , [JUDGMENT] and South Indian Bank v. Abdulla Kulukkampara3 .
3. In light thereof, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment dated 10 Mach 2025 in W.P(C)No.8944 of 2025. If
3[ 2024 SCC OnLine Ker 7015 ]
the Appellant approaches the Debts Recovery Tribunal, all contentions on merits are kept open.
4. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
NITIN JAMDAR CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
S.MANU JUDGE rp
