##PAGE1##

W.P.No.50451 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 26.12.2025

C O R A M

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

AND

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL

W.P.No.50451 of 2025

and

W.M.P.Nos.56484 & 56485 of 2025

Mohammed Nazeer

S/o.Sultan Mohiden ... Petitioner

-vs-

1. The Authorized Officer

South Indian Bank Ltd.,

Regional Office - Chennai

No.43, Ground Floor

Hameediya Centre, Haddows Road

Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 006.

2. Fathimuthu Zohara

Door No.8, Plot No.188/1

1^st Cross Street

3^rd Main Road, Natesan Nagar

Virugambakkam,

Chennai-600 092. ... Respondents

Prayer :

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for

issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating

to the order dated 22.12.2025 passed in S.A.No.709 of 2025 on the file of

1/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/12/2025 02:18:48 pm )

W.P.No.50451 of 2025

the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai and quash the same and

consequently, forbearing the 1^st respondent from proceeding with the

auction of the petitioner’s property in violation of law.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Vijayan

Senior Counsel

M/s.K.M.Vijayan Associates

For Respondents : M/s.Ramalingam and Associates

for R1

*****

O R D E R

(By.S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.,)

The writ has been instituted to assail the interim order passed by the

Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai, on 22.12.2025.

2. Admittedly, the main proceedings are pending before the Debts

Recovery Tribunal for adjudication. The impugned interim order has been

passed directing the writ petitioner / applicant to deposit 20% of amount

due on or before 30.12.2025 and the writ petitioner was further directed to

deposit 20% of amount due within a month. If any of the conditions are

not complied, the Bank would be at liberty to proceed with in accordance

with law.

3. No writ would lie against the order passed by the Debts Recovery

Tribunal. More so, the present writ petition has been filed challenging the

interim order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal. The principle

2/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/12/2025 02:18:48 pm )

W.P.No.50451 of 2025

regarding the maintainability of a writ petition against the order of Debts

Recovery Tribunal and action initiated under SARFAESI Act has been

settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Celir LLP Vs. Bafna

Motors (Mumbai) Private Limited and others reported in (2024) 2

SCC 1, and relevant portions are extracted hereunder.

“97.This Court has time and again, reminded the

High Courts that they should not entertain petition under

Article 226 ofthe Constitution if an effective remedy is

available to the aggrieved person under the provisions of

the SARFAESI Act. This Court in Satyawati Tondon

[United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon, (2010) 8

SCC 110 : (2010) 3 SCC (Civ) 260] made the following

observations : (SCC pp. 123 & 128, paras 43-45 & 55)

“43. Unfortunately, the High Court [Satyawati

Tondon v. State of U.P., 2009 SCC OnLine All 2608]

overlooked the settled law that the High Court will

ordinarily not entertain a petition under Article 226 of the

Constitution if an effective remedy is available to the

aggrieved person and that this rule applies with greater

rigour in matters involving recovery of taxes, cess, fees,

other types of public money and the dues of banks and

other financial institutions. In our view, while dealing with

the petitions involving challenge to the action taken for

recovery of the public dues, etc. the High Court must

keep in mind that the legislations enacted by Parliament

and State Legislatures for recovery of such dues are a

code unto themselves inasmuch as they not only contain

comprehensive procedure for recovery of the dues but

also envisage constitution of quasijudicial bodies for

redressal of the grievance of any aggrieved person.

Therefore, in all such cases, the High Court must insist

that before availing remedy under Article 226 of the

Constitution, a person must exhaust the remedies

available under the relevant statute.

44. While expres