Writ petition under Article 226 not maintainable when effective alternative remedy exists before Debts Recovery Tribunal under SARFAESI Act.

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)

Challenging the impugned proceedings under provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

3.At the outset, this Court is of the view that the Writ Petition is not maintainable, since the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal as against the order passed under Section 14 of the Act.

4.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent submitted that the petitioner has already challenged the impugned proceedings under the SARFEASI Act before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai, by filing S.A.No.SR 6647 of 2024 of 2026, which is pending.

5. In such circumstances, having already invoked the alternative statutory remedy before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the petitioner is not entitled to simultaneously pursue the present writ petition before this Court on the very same cause of action.

6. In such view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present Writ Petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. The petitioner shall redress itss grievances in the manner known to law before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.