- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 24 March 2023
- Bench
- R. Subramanian, S Justice L.Victoria Gowri
- Case no.
- WP(MD) 6482/2023
Judgment
ORDER (Order of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J) No doubt, we are entertaining the cases under SARFAESI Act due to the absence of the Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madurai and the difficulties faced by the litigants in approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal at Coimbatore in case of extreme urgency. But challenge in this writ petition is to the Sale Certificate issued by the bank after the conduct of the sale. The same has to be challenged before the Debts Recovery Tribunal in a manner known to law. We do not think that the absence of the Presiding Officer could be made a reason for this Court to invoke Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the facts of this case, where the sale has already been taken place. Hence, we do not see any reason to entertain this writ petition.
3.Hence, this writ petition fails and accordingly, the same is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to move the Debts Recovery Tribunal concerned. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [R.S.M., J.] & [L.V.G., J.]
24.03.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes skn W.P.(MD)No.6482eofe2023 R.SUBRAMANIAN.,oJ AND L.VICTORIAoGOWRI.,J skn W.P.(MD)No.6482oofo2023 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.6125oando6127oofo2023
24.03.2023
Case details
Parties and counsel
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24.03.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI and W.M.P(MD)Nos.6125 and 6127 of 2023 H.Shajahan : Petitioner Vs. 1.The Authorized Officer, The Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., Asset Recovery Branch, Mattuthavani-Melur Road, Near Matthuthavani Bus Stand, Madurai – 625 001. 2.M.Maria Antony, : Respondents PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the impugned Sale Certificate issued by the first respondent dated 21.02.2023 quash the same as illegal. For Petitioner : Mr.A.S.Abdul Kalam Azad For Respondents : Mr.R.Pandivel Standing Counsel for R1
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.