JUDGMENT

Dated this the 12th day of October, 2022 The petitioners have approached this Court being aggrieved by Ext.P6 order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Ernakulam through which the petitioners prayer for interim relief against the proceedings initiated by the respondent bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 has been declined.

2. Adv.Harish R.Menon, learned Counsel for the petitioners would vehemently contend that the petitioners have raised substantial contentions before the Tribunal including a contention that the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act cannot be initiated against the property in question on account of the fact that the property is an agricultural land, which is the outside the scope of the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. It is submitted that the reading of Ext.P6 order will suggest the Tribunal did not consider the contentions taken by the petitioner on merits and refused the interim relief in an arbitrary manner. It is submitted that notwithstanding the availability of a remedy of appeal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, the petitioners are also entitled to challenge Ext.P6 in a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of I