SANTOSH SHARMA Vs. ICICI BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition has been filed mainly for the following prayers:

(2.) Annexure P-6/order dated 16.02.2013, passed by the District Magistrate, District Sirmaur at Nahan, H.P., is under challenge and the petitioners have prayed for quashing the same. It appears that the petitioners have taken loan from ICICI Bank and the same has not been deposited by them. The outstanding amount of loan as on 03.12.2012, was Rs. 6,99,579/- (six lac ninety nine thousand five hundred seventy nine), for which an application has been moved by the ICICI Bank under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 ( in short 'the Act'). The copies of the application have been served to the learned counsel for the respondents under Section 13(2) of the 'Act'.

(3.) The District Magistrate by way of above detailed impugned order, Annexure P-6, above has directed to take into possession the properties and assets alongwith documents belonging to the petitioners. The learned counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2 submits that provisions of alternative remedies are availed under the 'Act', more specifically, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in United Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tandon and others, 2010 8 SCC 110, this Court is generously slow to give indulgence in such recovery matters while exercising its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Our attention has been invited to paragraph 55 of the judgment . For convenience paragraph 55 is quoted below: