- (1.) INSTANT petition has been filed assailing the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Securitisation Reconstruction of Financial Assets Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Act,2002).
(2.) THE petitioner who is principal borrower took cash credit facility from the respondent financial institution and after having become unable to pay the regular installments its account became NPA and after the notice U/s 13(2) of the Act, 2002 came to be served on 04.06.2011 opportunity was afforded to the petitioner to submit written objections U/s 13(3A) of the Act, 2002. However, after the expiry of statutory period of 60 days, the secured creditor proceeded further to take possession of immovable property over which the security interest was created and proceedings have been initiated by putting the secured asset to auction U/s 13(4) of the Act,2002 and if at all the petitioner is aggrieved after the proceedings U/s 13(4) being initiated, remedy is available by filing application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal U/s 17 of the Act,2002 which could always be availed if so advised. Counsel for petitioner submits that after the notice U/s 13(2) of the Act,2002 came to be served reasonable opportunity was not afforded to the petitioner to deposit the outstanding dues and at the same time the petitioner tendered a cheque of Rs.2,15,000/- dt.22.09.2011 but that too was not accepted by the respondent financial institution and in such circumstances the proceedings initiated by the secured creditor U/s 13(4) of the Act,2002 are wholly arbitrary and the process adopted by the respondent is not in conformity with the Act,2002. The submission made is wholly without substance at this stage for the reason that after the account of petitioner who is the principal borrower became NPA the secured creditor is always under its competence to initiate proceedings under the Act,2002 and from the material which has come on record after the initial notice U/s 13(2) of the Act,2002 being served and opportunity was afforded to the petitioner to submit written objections U/s 13(3A) of the Act, 2002 and only thereafter proceedings have been initiated for taking possession and auctioning the secured asset U/s 13(4) of the Act,2002 which provides remedy to the petitioner by filing application before the DRT U/s 17 of the Act,2002, that being so when effective remedy is available to the petitioner, it will not be appropriate for this Court to invoke its equitable jurisdiction U/Art.226 of the Constitution and what has been urged by the petitioner can always be examined by the DRT if approached under the Act,2002. Consequently, this Court does not find substance in the instant petition which accordingly stands dismissed.;