Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002:

Writ Jurisdiction of High Court under – Matter pertaining to default in payment of outstanding dues by the borrowers – Issuance of notices u/s. 13(4) – Writ petitions by the borrowers challenging the notices before the High Court – Debt Recovery tribunal was not functional at the time when said writ petitions were filed– However, became so from the month of March 2022 – Meanwhile, in an SLP, order passed by this Court to transfer the pending matters to the concerned tribunals when they start functioning with their respective Presiding Officers duly in-charge – Notwithstanding the said order, the High Court took upon itself to decide the said petitions and allowed the borrower to make deferred payment in 12 months – Appeal before this Court – Appellant’s case that the relief granted by the High Court may not be disturbed while pressing for reiteration of law which might guide the High Court in not entertaining such writ petitions in the future – Held: In view of the fair stand of the appellant, the relief granted by the High Court not to be disturbed – Powers conferred under Article 226 are rather wide but are required to be exercised only in extraordinary circumstances – In matters where the legislature has provided for a specific mechanism for appropriate redressal, constitutional remedy not to be resorted to – Constitution of India – Art. 226.

SARFAESI Act – Purpose and Object – Discussed.

Writ: 

Writ of certiorari – Issuance of, when – Held: Is to be issued over a decision when the Court finds that the process does not conform to the law or statute – Writ is not to be issued to remedy all violations – Writ court cannot substitute itself with the decision-making authority while finding fault with the process – When a tribunal is constituted,it is expected to determine issues of fact and law, including a statutory violation – Constitution of India – Art. 226.

Writ of mandamus – Issuance of – Writ petition before the High Court in commercial matters against the private individual seeking issuance of mandamus – Held: Writ of Mandamus is a prerogative writ – In the absence of any legal right, the Court cannot exercise the said power – More circumspection is required in a financial transaction, particularly when one of the parties would not come within the purview of Art. 12.

Judicial deprecation: Interference of the High Courts in matters pertaining to the SARFAESI Act – Held: Said practice is deprecated – Request to the High Courts not to entertain such cases – When a statute prescribes a particular mode, an attempt to circumvent shall not be encouraged by a writ court – A litigant cannot avoid the non-compliance of approaching the tribunal which requires the prescription of fees and use the constitutional remedy as an alternative – Constitution of India – Article 226.

Judicial notice: Commercial matters, where an effective and efficacious alternative forum has been constituted through a statute – Interference by certain High Court invoking Art. 226 in such matters leading to a regular supply of cases before this Court – Judicial notice taken by this Court.