"পশ্চিমবঙ্গের ঐতিহ্য, সংস্কৃতি, মানবতা ও জাতীয় চেতনার উত্তরাধিকার অক্ষুণ্ণ থাকুক। জয় হিন্দ।"
Ashok KUmar Singh Advocate High Court at Calcutta High Court Bar Association Room No. 15 High Court at Calcutta Mobile Number : 9883070666 Email : aksinghadvocate@rediffmail.com
Sit upright in your chair.
👉 This immediately reduces nervous tension and clears mental noise
Stand near your desk.
👉 Builds presence and authority before entering court
No visible “yoga”—just small movements:
👉 Removes hidden stress that affects your voice and delivery
Stay seated, lean slightly forward (hands on thighs or desk).
👉 Mimics calming effect without needing floor space
Eyes open or closed.
Silently say:
“One point at a time. Steady.”
Then:
👉 This locks your mind into execution mode, not anxiety
It’s designed to be professional and invisible
Do just:
That alone can stabilize you significantly.
“Clear mind. Short point. Controlled delivery.”
If you’re dealing with work/legal pressure, yoga can complement your meditation routine by releasing physical tension + stabilizing focus. You don’t need long sessions—what works is a short, targeted sequence you can repeat daily.
Here’s a lawyer-friendly yoga routine (15–20 minutes) focused on stress, posture, and mental clarity:
Start with controlled breathing to settle your system.
👉 Calms nerves before movement
Purpose: Grounding + posture correction
👉 Helps you feel stable and composed (useful before court)
Purpose: Release back and neck tension
👉 Excellent for long hours of drafting/sitting
Purpose: Open chest, reduce stress
👉 Counteracts hunched posture + mental fatigue
Purpose: Deep relaxation
👉 One of the best poses for instant calming
Purpose: Release spinal stiffness + improve focus
👉 Good for mental “reset” between work sessions
Purpose: Full system reset
👉 This is where stress actually drops
If you have only 5 minutes:
Yoga + your earlier mental protocol is a strong combination:
“Mr. Counsel, this is a SARFAESI matter. Why should we entertain this under writ?”
“Your Lordships are correct that ordinarily the remedy lies under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
The present case, however, is confined to a jurisdictional defect, namely that the bank could not have proceeded at all in the given facts.”
👉 No extra words. Stop there.
“What jurisdictional defect? Show us.”
“The short point, Your Lordships, is that [insert your strongest ground—e.g., the property is not a secured asset / petitioner is not a borrower / NPA classification is legally unsustainable].”
👉 One sentence only. Don’t expand unless asked.
“All this requires factual adjudication. Go to DRT.”
“Obliged, Your Lordships. The issue here is not factual adjudication, but whether the authority had jurisdiction to initiate proceedings at all.”
👉 Key phrase: “not factual, but jurisdictional”
“Alternate remedy is available. Why should we interfere?”
“Your Lordships are correct. However, it is settled that where the action is without jurisdiction or in violation of principles of natural justice, the bar of alternate remedy does not operate.”
👉 Don’t cite long case law unless asked.
“Don’t give us propositions. Show us from record.”
“Obliged, Your Lordships. At page __ of the petition, the impugned notice would show that [point out defect briefly].”
👉 Always be ready with page reference
“My Lords, all this is disputed—completely within DRT’s domain.”
“Your Lordships, I am not inviting adjudication on disputed facts. My submission is confined to the legality of the initiation itself.”
👉 Stay in your lane—legality, not facts
“We are not inclined to entertain.”
“Without prejudice, if Your Lordships are not inclined, the petitioner may be granted liberty to approach the DRT under Section 17, with limited interim protection.”
👉 Don’t argue further—switch instantly
“What protection?”
“Only a limited protection, Your Lordships—restraining coercive steps for a short period to enable the petitioner to approach the DRT.”
👉 Keep it modest—Calcutta benches prefer restraint
“Why did you not approach DRT earlier?”
“The petitioner approached this Hon’ble Court promptly upon becoming aware of the jurisdictional defect.”
👉 Never say “we thought writ is better”
“Give us one reason to interfere.”
“Because the very assumption of jurisdiction by the bank is contrary to the statute.”
👉 That’s your strongest closing line
“Short point. From the record. Jurisdictional error.”
“Why are you here under writ? Go to DRT.”
“Your Lordships are correct that ordinarily the remedy lies under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
However, the present case is on a short jurisdictional issue—namely, that the bank could not have proceeded at all. Hence, this limited invocation under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.”
👉 Calm agreement + narrow exception
“All this you can argue before DRT.”
“Obliged, Your Lordships. The distinction here is that the issue goes to the root of jurisdiction, not mere procedural irregularity.”
👉 One line. No argument.
“Was notice under Section 13(2) issued or not?”
“Yes, Your Lordships, a notice was issued. However, it was not served in accordance with law, and therefore the subsequent action stands vitiated.”
👉 Direct answer first → then qualification
“This is completely incorrect—service was duly effected!”
“Your Lordships, I will address that. The record would show that there is no valid proof of service in terms of the Rules.”
👉 Always route through Bench
“We are not inclined to entertain this.”
“Without prejudice, if Your Lordships are not inclined to entertain the writ, the petitioner may be granted liberty to approach the DRT under Section 17, with limited interim protection.”
👉 You shift before dismissal
“What protection do you want?”
“Only a limited protection, Your Lordships—restraining coercive steps for a short period, so that the petitioner may approach the DRT.”
👉 Keep it reasonable
“Why didn’t you go to DRT earlier?”
“The petitioner approached this Hon’ble Court at the earliest opportunity upon becoming aware of the jurisdictional defect.”
👉 Never admit delay casually
“What is your strongest point?”
“The short point, Your Lordships, is that the bank lacked jurisdiction to initiate proceedings in the present facts.”
👉 Always reduce to ONE line
“My primary submission is confined to jurisdiction…”
👉 Repeat calmly whenever needed
“Answer first. Explain briefly. Return to structure.”
Here’s a tailored courtroom script + behavior protocol you can actually use mid-hearing in a SARFAESI writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India:
“May it please Your Lordships, this petition challenges measures under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 on a short ground of lack of jurisdiction. I will make one primary submission and one without prejudice.”
👉 This signals: you’re concise → fewer interruptions
Don’t resist. Absorb and redirect.
“Your Lordships are right that ordinarily the remedy lies under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
However, the present case is on a jurisdictional issue, which goes to the root—hence the limited invocation of writ jurisdiction.”
👉 Tone: agree first → distinguish
“The short issue is this: the bank could not have proceeded at all because [insert your strongest jurisdictional defect].”
Stop. Don’t elaborate immediately.
Let the Bench react.
👉 With aggressive benches, less is more
“Obliged, Your Lordships. The answer is this…”
Then respond directly.
After answering:
“If I may just complete my submission—”
👉 This regains control politely
Use a 3-step response structure:
“Yes, Your Lordships.
The position is this…
Therefore…”
Example:
“Yes, Your Lordships. The notice under Section 13(2) was issued, but it was not served in the manner required. Therefore, subsequent action stands vitiated.”
👉 Short. Structured. No panic.
“May it please Your Lordships, this is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the measures taken by the secured creditor under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, including the [demand notice dated __ / possession notice dated __].
The petitioner seeks setting aside of the said action on the ground that it is ex facie without jurisdiction and in violation of the statutory mandate.”
“Your Lordships, I am conscious that ordinarily the remedy lies under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 before the learned DRT.
However, the present case falls within the well-recognized exceptions—namely, the action is without jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of the Act itself. Therefore, this Hon’ble Court’s writ jurisdiction is rightly invoked.”
“I will make two brief submissions:
(i) the very initiation of proceedings is without jurisdiction; and
(ii) even otherwise, the mandatory procedure under the Act has not been followed.”
[Pick the version that matches your case]
“My first submission is that the account has been classified as NPA without compliance with RBI norms, and therefore the very foundation of the proceedings is vitiated.”
“The action has been initiated against the petitioner who is not a borrower in the eye of law, and therefore the proceedings are without jurisdiction.”
“The property in question does not fall within the definition of a secured asset, and hence the invocation of SARFAESI is wholly without authority.”
👉 (Pause here—let the Court absorb)
“Without prejudice, even the procedure mandated under the Act has not been followed.”
Then insert specifics:
“There is non-compliance with Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 inasmuch as [defect].
Further, the measures under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 have been taken without adhering to the prescribed rules, particularly [valuation / service / possession irregularity].”
“Your Lordships are conscious of the judgment in United Bank of India v. Satyawati Tondon, where it has been held that writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily be exercised in such matters.
However, the present case clearly falls within the exceptions recognized therein, as the action is ex facie without jurisdiction and contrary to the statute.”
“Yes, Your Lordships. The alternate remedy is not disputed. However, where the action itself is without jurisdiction, the bar does not operate.”
“The issue here is not factual adjudication, but the legality of the decision-making process.”
(Shift tone—be practical)
“Without prejudice, if Your Lordships are inclined to relegate the petitioner to the DRT, the petitioner may be granted limited protection.”
“The petitioner is facing imminent coercive steps, including [possession / auction].
It is therefore prayed that, for a limited period, the respondents be restrained, so as to enable the petitioner to approach the DRT under Section 17.”
“The short issue, Your Lordships, is whether the bank could have proceeded at all in the present facts…”
“In these circumstances, it is respectfully prayed that the impugned action be set aside.
Alternatively, the petitioner may be granted liberty to approach the DRT with appropriate interim protection.”