Judgment · High Court · 2009
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 28 Jan 2009
- Bench
- GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS
Provisions considered
Judgment
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Girish Joshi, for the petitioners. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. In this case, an alternative remedy is available to the petitioners by way of filing appeal under Section 17 (1) of the Securitisation & Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Section 17 (1) of the Act of 2002 reads as under :
17 Right to appeal. - (1) Any person (including borrower), aggrieved by any of the measures referred to in sub-section (4) of section 13 taken by the secured creditor or his authorised officer under this Chapter, may make an application along with such fee, as may be prescribed to the Debts Recovery 2 Tribunal having jurisdiction in the matter within forty-five days from the date on which such measures had been take: Provided that different fees may be prescribed for making the application by the borrower and the person other than the borrower.
In this view of the matter, no case for interference is made out under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J.
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?
Rajasthan High Court, on 28 Jan 2009. The bench was GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS.
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.