Patna High CourtCWJC/11982/2014dismissed

Manoj Kumar And ORS v. Central Bank Of India And ORS

2016-04-27Mr. Justice Vikash Jain2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11982 of 2014 ======================================================

1. Manoj Kumar:

2. Dilip Kumar:

3. Mukesh Kumar:

All sons of Late Jagdish Prasad, residing at Mohalla Gola Road, P.S. Town Thana, Muzaffarpur, District & Town Muzaffarpur 842 001, Bihar .... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. Central Bank of India, a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertaking) Act, having its Central Office at Chandermukhi, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021; through its Chairman.

2. Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Speaker Chowk, Muzaffarpur 842001

3. Chief Manager, Central Bank of India, Zonal Office, Pawapuri Vihar Building, N H 28, Mhagwanpur, District Muzaffarpur 842 001

4. Authorised Officer, Central Bank of India, Speaker Chowk, Muzaffarpur 842001 .......... ... ... Respondents-Ist Party

5. Dr. Manju Kumari Wife of late Binay Kumar Singh, resident of Shivkunj Bela Bihar, P.S. Town, District Muzaffarpur 842001;............... ..............Respondent-IInd Party

6. Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pana;

7. Mr. U.C. Mohanty, the then Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna; ...........................................Respondent-IIIrd Party .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Mukund Jee, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha Mr. Pushpendra Kr. Singh, Advocates ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 27-04-2016 The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 25.03.2014 passed in M.A. No. 25 of 2014 as well as the order dated 19.12.2013 passed in S.A. No. 162 of 2011, both by the Presiding Officers, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Patna.

2. In view of the statutory remedy available to the petitioners under the provisions of the Securitization and

Patna High Court CWJC No.11982 of 2014 (12) dt.27-04-2016 2/2 Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, 'the SARFAESI Act') against the impugned orders, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of the matter. The petitioners shall be at liberty to avail the statutory remedy available to them in accordance with law.

3. The writ petition stands dismissed.

(Vikash Jain, J) B.T/- U