SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 25646

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P. V. Balakrishnan, J
Sudheer Kareem – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Canara Bank Limited – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 12877 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri. Asok Chacko Thomas, Shri. Midhun Vadakkan
For the Respondents: Sri. C. Ajith Kumar (Kallesseril), SC

Writ petitions against SARFAESI proceedings not maintainable due to efficacious DRT remedy.

Headnote:The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) provides for enforcement of security interest. Petitioner challenged coercive actions under Section 13 notices issued by respondent bank. Court found petitioner has alternative remedy before Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). Issue: Whether writ petition against SARFAESI proceedings is maintainable. Court relied on Supreme Court decisions holding writ petitions not entertainable due to efficacious DRT remedy. Writ petition dismissed without prejudice to pursue statutory remedy before DRT.

Table of Content
1. petition challenges sarfaesi coercive actions. (Para 1)
2. parties argue alternative drt remedy. (Para 2 , 3)
3. writs not maintainable; drt remedy preferred. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

It is aggrieved by the coercive action taken by the respondent under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘SARFAESI Act' for short), this writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed entertaining this writ petition and granting the reliefs to the petitioner since, he has an efficacious alternative remedy before the DRT.

4. I find considerable force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent. 5. The Honourable Apex Court in a catena of decisions including the decisions in Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd. v. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir and Others [2022 KHCOnLine 6040], South Indian Bank Ltd. (M/s.) v. NaveenMathew Philip [ 2023 KHC OnLine 6435 ] and PHR Invent Educational Society v. UCO Bank [2024 KHC OnLine 6208],have categorically held that writ petitions against SARFAESI proceedings must not be entertained since the aggrieved persons have an alternative and efficacious remedy before the DRT.

In such circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions and right of the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top