NON REPORTABLE

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA   CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.5673 OF 2008 (Arising out of SLP©No.21077 of 2006)

Mariamma Roy  ….Appellant

Versus

Indian Bank & Ors.                 ….Respondents

O R D E R

1. Leave granted.

2. This  appeal  is  directed  against  the  judgment  and

final order dated 25th of October, 2006 passed by a

learned  Judge  of  the  High  Court  of  Kerala  at

Ernakulam in W.P.(C)No.22642  of  2006  by  which

the  writ  petition was dismissed  on the  ground of

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

1

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

2

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]

3

New Delhi; ………………………J. September 16, 2008. [Aftab Alam]

4