M/S. Sri.Vinayaga Trading Enterprises v. Canara Bank

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.04.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.8739, 8740 & 8741 of 2023 M/s.Sri Vinayaga Trading Enterprises rep.by its Proprietor P.Namachivayam S/o.N.Periyasamy Plot No.13/14, Sri Siva Sakthi Nagar Mathur Post, Pudukkottai-622 515 ... Petitioner -vs1.Canara Bank rep.by its Authorised Officer SR College Branch Tiruchirappalli Sankaran Pillai Road Tiruchirappalli-620 002 2.Thanabackiyam ... Respondents

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in connection with the impugned sale certificate issued in favour of the second respondent vide his proceedings No.Nil dated 30.09.2022 and quash the same as arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent Bank to accept the entire outstanding due payable as per the agreement of the one time settlement (OTS) dated 24.01.2022, within a time limit stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner :

Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu For Respondents :

Mr.C.Deepak for R1

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.] The attempt made by the petitioner to challenge the sale certificate before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai, failed, because the Tribunal concluded that it has no power to condone the delay in filing the original proceedings under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial and Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

2. The order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal is dated 10.03.2023. Having failed to convince the Tribunal that it has jurisdiction to condone the delay, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the very same sale certificate issued. We do not think that we can entertain such challenge, since there is an appeal remedy available to the petitioner before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal.

3. Hence, leaving it open to the petitioner invoke the appeal remedy, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

[R.S.M., J.] [L.V.G., J.] 27.04.2023 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No krk

R.SUBRAMANIAN , J.

and L.VICTORIA GOWRI , J.

krk and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.8739, 8740 & 8741 of 2023 27.04.2023