Mohd Raza Sayyed Director M/S Crp Technologies(I) Ltd. (Guarantor) v. State Bank Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.18261 OF 2024 Mohd. Raza Sayyed .. Petitioner Vs.

State Bank of India, Mumbai .. Respondent Mr. A.K. Shukla, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Sanjay Kelkar with Mr. Omkar Kelkar, Advocates for the Respondent. CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR & M.M. SATHAYE, JJ DATE : 3RD JANUARY 2025.

P.C. :

1.

Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent-Bank be filed during the course of the day today.

2.

The challenge raised in this writ petition is to the order dated 19th August 2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thane in proceedings under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. Since the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy of approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. 3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is desirous of settling the dues of the respondent-Bank. The learned counsel for the Bank, on instructions, submits that if the petitioner approaches the 1/2 Digitally signed by SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT Date:

2025.01.03 16:41:03 +0530 Dixit SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT 901-WP-18261-2024.doc

Bank with a proposal, the same would be considered in accordance with the prevailing policy.

4.

It is open for the petitioner to approach the respondent-Bank with a view to clear the outstanding dues. If such proposal is made, the Bank is free to consider the same in accordance with the prevailing policy. All points raised in the writ petition are kept open and with a liberty to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the writ petition is disposed of as not entertained.

[ M.M. SATHAYE, J. ] [ A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ] 2/2 901-WP-18261-2024.doc Dixit