The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by Debpara Tea Company against the State Bank of India, ruling that a micro, small and medium enterprise cannot seek the benefit of the Framework for Revival and Rehabilitation of MSMEs at a belated stage after recovery proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act have begun. Justice Krishna Rao observed that Debpara Tea Company sought the framework’s benefit only after SBI issued a notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. The company had also approached the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under Section 17, where its securitisation application remained pending. The company received financial assistance of Rs. 137.3 mn in October 2020, which was enhanced in May 2022. SBI classified the account as a non-performing asset on December 29, 2023, and issued a demand notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act on March 21, 2024. Debpara Tea Company submitted a representation to SBI on July 15, 2024, but the court noted that it did not seek the benefit of the MSME revival framework at that stage. SBI subsequently issued the Section 13(4) notice on September 16, 2024, following which the company pursued its statutory remedy before the DRT. The High Court held that once the company had invoked the DRT remedy, its grievance could not be adjudicated through a writ petition. Referring to the judgments in Pro Knits and Shri Shri Swami Samarth, it said banks must follow the MSME framework before classifying an account as a non-performing asset, while an eligible enterprise must assert its entitlement promptly and follow the prescribed procedure. The court therefore declined to extend the revival framework’s benefit at the later stage and dismissed the petition.