Mariamma Roy vs Indian Bank & Ors

availability of an alternative remedy to the

appellant.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties

and examined the impugned order as well as the

other materials on record. After examining the 2

impugned order as well as the materials on record,

we are of the view that the order of the High Court

cannot be sustained. Before the High Court, the

appellant sought to contend that before passing the

impugned order, the appellant was not at all issued

with any notice. The High Court, however, without

going into the question whether the notice was at all

served on the appellant or not, dismissed the writ

petition only on the ground that the appellant has

got a right of appeal against the impugned order

under the provisions of the Recovery of Debts due

to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993. In

our view, the High Court was not justified in

passing the impugned order on the aforesaid

ground. It is well settled that even if an alternative

remedy was available to an aggrieved party against

a particular order, but if it was open to such party

to move a writ application and the court has the

power to entertain the same if it finds that while

passing the order there has been a violation of the 3

principle of natural justice. That being the position,

in the present case the appellant was not served

with any notice before passing the impugned order.

That being the position and without going into the

merits, the impugned order is set aside and the

matter is remitted back to the High Court for

decision on merits in accordance with law. The High

Court is requested to dispose of the writ petition at

an early date preferably within six months from the

date of supply of a copy of this order to it. We make

it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the

dispute raised by the parties before us, all

questions are left open to be decided by the High

Court in accordance with law. The impugned order

is, therefore, set aside and the appeal is allowed to

the extent indicated above. There will be no order as

to costs

............................J [Tarun Chatterjee]

New Delhi; ..................

.........J. 4

September 16, 2008. [Aftab Alam]