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) 27541

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, J
SINDHU JAYAKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
THE AUTHORISED OFFICER, THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 7163 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.ABHILASH S.FRANCIS
For the Respondents: SHRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR

Writ petitions against SARFAESI proceedings not entertainable due to alternative remedy at Debts Recovery Tribunal.

Headnote:The Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ('SARFAESI Act') provides measures for enforcement of security interests. Petitioner challenged coercive recovery steps by bank under the SARFAESI Act through writ petition. Court found alternative statutory remedy available before Debts Recovery Tribunal, as affirmed in multiple Apex Court precedents. Primary issue was maintainability of writ petition against SARFAESI proceedings. Court relied on Supreme Court rulings holding that such petitions are not entertainable due to efficacious remedy under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act before Debts Recovery Tribunal. Writ petition dismissed without prejudice to pursue statutory remedies.

Table of Content
1. petition challenges sarfaesi coercive measures. (Para 1)
2. counsel oppose writ due to drt remedy. (Para 2 , 3)
3. apex court precedents bar writ jurisdiction. (Para 4)

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 10th day of April, 2026 It is aggrieved by the coercive steps taken by respondents 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 learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents vehemently opposed entertaining this writ petition and granting the reliefs to the petitioner since, she has an efficacious alternative remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

4. 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 KHC OnLine 6040], South Indian Bank Ltd. (M/s.) v. Naveen Mathew 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 Debts Recovery Tribunal.

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