Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Supreme Court Upholds Rule of Alternate Remedy, Restricts High Court Interference in SARFAESI Cases

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court emphasized the limitations on High Court interference in cases related to the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI Act). The Court invoked the rule of alternate remedy and urged litigants to exhaust statutory remedies before approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice M.M. Sundresh, the bench hearing the case, underscored the discretionary power of the High Court and the exceptions to the rule of alternate remedy. They stated, "The High Court has the discretion not to entertain a writ petition. But the alternative remedy has been consistently held by this Court not to operate as a bar... where the writ petition seeks enforcement of any of the fundamental rights or where there has been a violation of the principle of natural justice or where the order or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of an Act is challenged."

The Court further emphasized that financial transactions, especially those involving non-state entities, require careful consideration and adherence to the prescribed procedures. Quoting from previous judgments, the Court stated, "When a statute prescribes a particular mode, an attempt to circumvent shall not be encouraged by a writ court... A litigant cannot avoid the noncompliance of approaching the Tribunal which requires the prescription of fees and use the constitutional remedy as an alternative."

Highlighting the need for caution and circumspection, the Court remarked, "The powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are rather wide but are required to be exercised only in extraordinary circumstances in matters pertaining to proceedings and adjudicatory scheme qua a statute, more so in commercial matters involving a lender and a borrower when the legislature has provided for a specific mechanism for appropriate redressal."

DATE OF DECISION: April 17, 2023

 M/S. SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD. & ORS. vs NAVEEN MATHEW PHILIP & ANR. ETC. ETC.   

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/17-Apr-2023-SOUTH-INDIAN-BANK-vs-NAVEEN.pdf"]

Latest Legal News