HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR W.P.No. 32568 of 2010 Date: 18-01-2010 Between M/s. Venkataiah Stone Crushing Industry ……….. Petitioner and State Bank of Hyderabad, Saidabad Branch, Hyderabad and another …….. Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N. RAVI SHANKAR W.P.No. 32568 of 2010 ORDER: (Per GM, J) This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing possession notice, dated 09-12-2000, for taking over the immovable property even before the expiry of the statutory period of 60 days from the date of service of notice issued under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SARFAESI Act’), as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to declare the said notice as null and void. The petitioner-crushing industry has obtained mortgage loan from the respondent-bank and subsequently, committed default in repayment of the loan amount. Therefore, the bank issued notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act on 01-09-2010, which was said to be served on the petitioner-crushing industry on 18-11-2010. Thereafter, the petitioner-crushing industry made a representation on 18-11-2010 to the bank authorities requesting to give one month time for repayment of the entire amount and in the meanwhile, within fifteen days, it will pay an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-, but did not pay any amount. Therefore, the respondents- bank has issued possession notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondents-bank and perused the material available on record. If the petitioner-crushing industry is so aggrieved by the possession notice issued by the respondents-bank, there is an alternative remedy available to it to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal as provided under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. The Supreme Court also held in its recent judgments that the power of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India shall not be exercised when there is alternative remedy available under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. In the circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed. It is open for the petitioner-crushing unit to avail the alternative remedy available to it by approaching the Debt Recovery Tribunal. No order as to costs. ____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J __________________ N. RAVI SHANKAR, J Date:18-01-2010 YCR