In matter relating to recovery of Bank’s due, if other remedies are available which arises from special statutes, then Court will not entertain Writ Petition. [Patna High Court]

Rohit Pradhan | 25th November 2019

M/s Innotech Educational Society & Ors. v. The State Bank of India & Anr., Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20013 of 2019

Facts

Debt Recovery Tribunal (Patna) ordered that Bank can recover the Amount of Rs. 18,46,07,843.523/- from the Petitioner along with the pendentlite and Future Interest. Against the said order Petitioner filed the present Writ Petition of Certiorari.

Court’s observation:

The judgment and certificate of recovery issued by the Tribunal under Section ‘19’ of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1993’) is appealable before the Appellate Tribunal under Section ‘20’ of the Act of 1993 within a period of 30 days from the date of the judgment. It seems that instead of availing the adequate, efficacious and alternative remedy of appeal within the prescribed period of limitation, the petitioners have chosen to file this writ application after one year from the date of the judgment and the certificate of recovery.

Ratio Decidendi:

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has on many occasions taken a view that in the matter relating to recovery of Bank’s dues where an alternative statutory forum has been provided under the special statute, it would not be just and proper to entertain a writ application, unless the statutory remedies are exhausted.

Held:

There is no reason to entertain the present writ application. The application is dismissed. The petitioners, if so advised may seek their remedy in accordance with law.