IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.525 of 2011 2 25.7.2011 Gopal Krishan Sharma, s/o Late Gangadhar Sharma, resident of Anar Ganga Basenti Dham, Castair Town, Deoghar, P.S. & District Deoghar, Jharkhand- 816112 …. Petitioner/ Appellant VERSUS 1. Central Bank of Indiaa, Brnach at Budh Marg, Post Office- G.P.O., P.S. Kotwali, Town & District- Pana 2. M/s New Fashion Trading Agency, having its workshop at East Ashok Nagar, Lane No.2, P.S. Kankarbagh, District Patna-800020 and workshop at Pachim Darwaza, P.S. Sultanganj, District- Patna and office at Ujjain Hotel, Dak Bunglow Road, P.S. Kotwali, District Patna 800001 3. Sri Krishna Kumar Sharma, S/o Sri Gangadhar Sharma of Tarekeshwar Path, P.S. Kankarbagh, District Patna- 800020 and Mohalla- 99/100, Govind Nagar, Amar Road, District Jaipur, State Rajasthan and of Basanti Dham, Caster Tow, Baij Nath Dham, P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar 4. Sri Basant Sao, D/o Dukhu Sao of village- Mathor, P.S. Makhdumpur, District- Gaya and resident of Road No.1, Rajendra Nagar, P.S. Kadamkuan, District Patna 800003 and of East Ashok Nagar, Kankarbagh, P.S. Kankarbagh, District Patna- 800020 5. The Debts Recovery Tribunal, through the Incharge Registrar, Bank Road, Behind Goal Ghar, Patna …. Respondents/ Respondents -------- Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the order under appeal whereby the writ petitioner/ appellant has been relegated to the appellate authority under Section 20 of the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. Learned counsel for the appellant/ writ - 2 - petitioner submits that the order passed by the Tribunal dated 21.12.2010 impugned before the Writ Court cannot be treated to be an order under Section 19 of the said Act and, therefore, it is not an appelable order. On going through the provisions of appeal under Section 20, it is found that the only exceptional order which is not appealable is an order made by the Tribunal with the consent of the parties. All other orders made or deemed to have been made by the Tribunal under the Act have been made appealable. In that view of the matter, we are of the view that the Writ Court has committed no error in asking the writ petitioner to avail the statutory alternative remedy. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. It is made clear that we are not prepared to go into the merit of the submission advanced on behalf of the appellant because of availability of the alternative remedy. sk (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Shivaji Pandey, J.)