(The Order of the Court was made by S.J.Mukhopadhaya,J) In this case, the petitioner has challenged the validity of Sections 17(2) to 17(4) of the SARFAESI Act. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties submits that similar matter fell for consideration before a Full Bench of this Court in the case of "Lakshmi Shankar Mills (P) Ltd., Vs. The Authorised Officer/Chief Manager, Indian Bank" reported in 2008 (2) C.T.C. 529 (FB), wherein the Court held as follows: "22. In the light of the foregoing discussion, we summarise our findings as follows:
(i) The right of the Bank is not automatically suspended upon filing of an Application under Section 17 of the Securitisation Act and the secured creditor can proceed to auction secured asset where no stay is granted by the Tribunal.
(ii) The Tribunal has power to impose the condition relating to deposit for grant of stay of auction.
(iii) The Tribunal has no power to pass any interim mandatory order relating to restoration of possession or restoration of management before the finalisation of the proceedings under Section 17 of the Securitisation Act, and
(iv) All such grounds, which rendered the action of the Bank/Financial Institution illegal, can be raised in the proceedings under Section 17 of the Securitisation Act before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. It is for the Debt Recovery Tribunal to decide in each case whether the action of the Bank/Financial Institution was in accordance with the provisions of the said Act and legally sustainable."
2. In view of such findings already given by this Court, for the reasons mentioned therein, this Writ Petition also stands disposed of with the same and similar observations. No costs. The Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
cs To
1. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue, New Delhi.
2. The Presiding Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal-I, Spencer Towers, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002