Senthilkumar E v. The Authorised Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.12.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN and W.M.P.(MD) No.21069 of 2022 E.Senthilkumar ... Petitioner -vsThe Authorised Officer Bank of Baroda Regional Office Stressed Assets Recovery Branch ROSARB Plot No.14, Door No.3, 4 & 5 Sakthi Velammal 10th Street SS Colony Madurai-625 016 ... Respondent

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned sale notice dated 01.11.2022, issued by the respondent Bank and quash the same as illegal.

For Petitioner :

Mr.N.Ganga Sapapathy For Respondent :

Mr.B.Rajesh Saravanan

O R D E R

[Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.] The sale notice, dated 01.11.2022, issued by the respondent - Bank, is sought to be quashed in the present writ petition.

2. The writ petition is not entertainable, since action was initiated under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and if aggrieved, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the jurisdictional Debts Recovery Tribunal for redressal of his grievance. Granting fifteen days time from the date of receipt of a copy of

this order to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Debts Recovery Tribunal, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

[S.M.S., J.] [V.L.N., J.] 20.12.2023 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No Note:

The Registry is directed to return the original sale notice, dated 01.11.2022 to the learned counsel for the petitioner, after obtaining due acknowledgement and retaining a copy of the same for file.

krk

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

and V.

LAKSHMINARAYANAN , J.

krk and W.M.P.(MD) No.21069 of 2022 20.12.2023