A.Rajeshwar Rao v. Debts Recovery Tribunal of A.P & Anr.
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY WRIT PETITION No.5539 of 2012 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) The petitioner availed a business loan of Rs.2,50,000/- by mortgaging immovable property. The loan became non-performing asset. When the second respondent invoked the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (the Act), and issued possession notice, the petitioner allegedly paid some amounts on 21.07.2011, 25.07.2011 and 30.11.2011. In the meanwhile, the second respondent moved an application under Section 14 of the Act before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District, and an Advocate Commissioner was appointed to take physical possession. At that stage, the petitioner approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal by filing an application under Section 17(1) of the Act. The said securitisation application is still pending. In this case, the petitioner contends that the first respondent, namely, the Debts Recovery Tribunal, is not taking up the matter, and there is imminent threat of the petitioner being dispossessed. It is well settled that when a person aggrieved has already availed the statutory remedy provided under the statute, he cannot again invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India (Bombay Metropolitan Region Development Authority, Bombay v. Gokak Patel Volkart Ltd. [1] ). In view of this, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. We, however, request the Debts Recovery Tribunal to take up the securitisation application, if any filed by the petitioner, expeditiously. The Writ Petition, with the above observations, is accordingly dismissed. The W.P.M.P shall also stand dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) ________________________________
(G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J)
02.03.2012 [1] (1995) 1 SCC 642
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002; Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 02 Mar 2012. The bench was V V S RAO, G KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.