ORDER The petitioner has filed a Suit in O.S.SR.No.6886 of 2015 against the respondent for declaration that he has not created any valid equitable mortgage as mentioned in the possession notice and to declare the possession notice dated 24.07.2015 as illegal, invalid and non-est in the eye of law. 2. The said plaint was rejected by the learned District Munsif, Kulithalai on the ground that the Suit is barred by the law under Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act. The petitioner has filed another plaint by rectifying the defects by invoking Order 7 Rule 13 of C.P.C. for the relief of declaration, declaring the proceedings initiated by the respondent under SARFAESI Act as illegal, invalid and non-est in the eye of law as per Section 31 G of SARFAESI Act. 3. The learned Judge returned the plaint on 18.02.2015 stating that as to how the Suit is maintainable, as already an order was passed by the Court in respect of the same subject and cause of action. In view of the rejection of earlier plaint, the petitioner represented the said plaint stating that the Suit is maintainable as per Order 7 Rule 13 of C.P.C. The learned Judge returned the plaint stating that as to how the Court has jurisdiction. Against the said return, the petitioner appears before this Court with this Civil Revision Petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. is not a bar for subsequent Suit based on the same cause of action. The provision of the said Act will not applicable to the cases mentioned under Section 31 of the SARFAESI Act. The relief claimed by the petitioner falls under Section 31 G of the SARFAESI Act. As per Section 60(1)A of C.P.C. the property in question is not attachable. Therefore the Suit is maintainable. The learned Judge erred in rejecting the plaint stating that the Court has no jurisdiction. Therefore, prayed for allowing the Civil Revision Petition for a direction to number the Suit filed by him and set aside the impugned order on merits. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record. 6. From the materials it is seen that the respondent has issued notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record. 6. From the materials it is seen that the respondent has issued notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. Originally the petitioner presented the plaint for declaration that he has not created any equitable mortgage as mentioned in the said notice and for a declaration that to declare the said possession notice as null and void and non-est in the eye of law. The said plaint was rejected by the learned Judge as per Order 7 Rule 11 of C.P.C. The petitioner presented the present plaint claiming declaration that proceedings initiated by the respondent under SARFAESI Act as illegal and invalid and non-est in the eye of law as per Section 31 G of SARFAESI ACT. The plaint was returned by the learned Judge stating that as to how the Suit is maintainable, in view of the earlier order passed in respect of same subject and cause of action. The petitioner represented the plaint stating that as per Order 7 Rule 13 C.P.C. rejection of earlier plaint is not a bar present Suit. Again the plaint was returned to explain as to how the Court has got jurisdiction to entertain the Suit. 7. Against the said return, the petitioner has filed the present Civil Revision Petition. 8. From the materials on record, it is seen that the petitioner is seeking a direction for declaration, to declare notice issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act. As per Section 17(1) of SURFAESI Act, the petitioner has a right to file an appeal challenging the said notice. The petitioner instead of approaching Debt Recovery Tribunal has filed Suit under Section 31 G of the SARFAESI Act and Section 60(1)A of C.P.C. are not applicable to enable the petitioner to maintain the Suit in Civil Court. In view of Sections 17 and 34 of SARFAESI Act, the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit, in respect of the relief sought for by the petitioner. 9. For the above reasons, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. No Costs.