p. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.22949 of 2025 Akshaya Samal ….. Petitioner Mr. Subhendu Kumar Das, Advocate -versus- 1. Authorized Officer, Axis Bank Limited, Kolkata, West Bengal 2. Authorized Officer, Axis Bank Limited, Loan Center, Bhubaneswar ..... Opp. Parties CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. SAHOO HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S. S. MISHRA Order No. ORDER 20.08.2025 01. This matter is taken up through Hybrid arrangement (video conferencing/physical mode). This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Akshaya Samal with a prayer to consider the representation of the petitioner under Annexure-6 for One Time Settlement. It appears that the possession notice under section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act has already been issued. In case of PHR Invent Educational Society -Vrs.- UCO Bank and others reported in (2024) 6 Supreme Court Cases 579 so also in the case of CELIR LLP -Vrs.- Bafna Motors (Mumbai) Private Limited and others reported in (2024) 2 Supreme Court Cases 1, it has been held that the High Court should not entertain the writ Digitally Signed Signed by: RAJESH KUMAR BADHEI Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 22-Aug-2025 16:45:39 Signature Not Verified p. 2 jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution when alternative remedy is available under section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. In the case of Bafna Motors (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as follows: “110.3. In accordance with the unamended Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act, the right of the borrower to redeem the secured asset was available till the sale or transfer of such secured asset. In other words, the borrower's right of redemption did not stand terminated on the date of the auction-sale of the secured asset itself and remained alive till the transfer was completed in favour of the auction-purchaser, by registration of the sale certificate and delivery of possession of the secured asset. However, the amended provisions of Section 13(8) of the SARFAESI Act, make it clear that the right of the borrower to redeem the secured asset stands extinguished thereunder on the very date of publication of the notice for public auction under Rule 9(1) of the 2002 Rules. In effect, the right of redemption available to the borrower under the present statutory regime is drastically curtailed and would be available only till the date of publication of the notice under Rule 9(1) of the 2002 Rules and not till the completion of the sale or transfer of the secured asset in favour of the auction-purchaser.” After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the ratio laid down in the case of Bafna Motors (supra), we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. However, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the DRT under section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. If such an approach is made, the same shall be considered in accordance with law. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Page 3 of 3 Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application. ( S.K. Sahoo) Judge (S.S. Mishra) Judge Rajesh