THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.19260 OF 2011 Dated: 08.07.2011 Between: 1. Ch. Vijay Thomas and another. … Petitioners AND The State Bank of Hyderabad, RACPC, rep. by Its Manager, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad., And another. … Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.19260 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the action of the respondents – State Bank of Hyderabad – in proposing to auction the Flat bearing No.S-2 of Blue Heavens, Mallapur Village, Uppal Mandal, belonging to the petitioners, vide sale notice dated 4.6.2011 issued under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, ‘SARFAESI Act’). I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Admittedly the petitioners availed the financial loan from the 1st respondent Bank and there was default in repayments as per the prescribed schedule. The material available on record shows that having invoked the provisions of SARFAESI Act, the 1st respondent Bank issued notice under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act, dated 7.12.2010 followed by the possession notice dated 17.2.2011 under Section 13 (4) of the SARFAESI Act. Thereafter, the impugned auction notice came to be issued for sale of the property in question. At the outset, it is to be noticed that under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, any person aggrieved by any of the measures referred to in Section 13 (4) by the secured creditor or his authorized officer has to make an application to the Debts Recovery Tribunal having jurisdiction in the matter within 45 days from the date on which such measures had been taken. Against the order passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, a further appeal lies under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act to the Appellate Tribunal. In the light of such efficacious alternative remedy available under the Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, the petitioner cannot straightaway invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence the Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed on the said ground alone. Accordingly, granting leave and liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy available under law, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. ___________ G.ROHINI, J Dt. 08.07.2011 gbs