VIRENDER SINGH, J. - (1.) When the appellant-writ petitioner (hereinafter to be referred as 'petitioner') earlier moved this Court through the medium of W.P.(C) No. 1032 of 2016, the petitioner-company had responded to the notice dated 20.10.2015 issued to it under subsection 2 of Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and during the pendency of the said writ petition, a notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act was also drawn.
(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner-company submitted that because of the said development during the pendency of the aforesaid writ, the petitioner-company sought permission to withdraw the writ petition in order to approach the appropriate forum available under the SARFAESI Act in which, the permission was granted to the petitioner-company to raise all the pleas available to him and already taken in the aforesaid writ petition before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). It is thereafter, the petitioner-company resorted to the provision under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act and availed alternative forum before the DRT. The petitioner-company thereafter submitted a Corrective Action Plan before the Assistant General Manager, Bank of Baroda (respondent herein) which plan was not accepted by the Senior Manager as is evident from the noting dated 11.03.2016. Aggrieved of the said noting, petitioner-company has once again moved the Writ Court through the medium of W.P.(C) No. 1760 of 2016 which now stands dismissed on the ground that the petitioner-company has already moved DRT after liberty was granted to it in the earlier Writ Petition being, W.P.(C) No. 1032 of 2016 on 29.02.2016. Aggrieved of the said order, the instant appeal has been filed by the petitioner-company.
(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and going through the impugned order, we do not find any infirmity in the same calling for our indulgence. The instant appeal thus merits dismissal.;