Roma Chauhan vs Managing Director-Cum-Chairman ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1510 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.5729 of 2020.

.

Date of Decision : March 02, 2021.

Roma Chauhan                                                   ...Petitioner.

                          Versus

Managing Director-cum-Chairman Kangra Co-operative Bank Ltd. & Others.

...Respondents.

Coram:

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No.

For the petitioner : Mr. Nitin Thakur, Advocate.

For the respondents : Mr. Rakesh Thakur, Advocate.

Anoop Chitkara, Judge (oral).

Challenging the rejection of One Time Settlement

proposal, the petitioner has come up before this Court seeking

quashing of the rejection order.

2. In a nut shell, the petitioner and her associates are

borrowers of Kangra Central Co-operative Bank Limited and the total

outstanding dues exceed much more than twenty five crores.

3. Mr. Rakesh Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent-Bank, based on the reply, submits that this Court has no

jurisdiction to entertain this petition. Section 17 of 'The Securitisation

and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security

Interest Act, 2002' (after now called as 'SARFAESI Act') provides for

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

redressal of the disputes through Debts Recovery Tribunal. Appeal

against such order lies under Section 18 to Appellate Tribunal.

.

Section 35 of the SARFAESI Act provides that the provisions of this Act

shall have effect, notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith

contained in any other law for the time being in force or any

instrument having effect by virtue of any such law.

4. In view of the provisions contained under the SARFAESI

Act coupled with the pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court

in Authorized Officer, State Bank Of Travancore and Another

versus Mathew K.C., (2018) 3 SCC 85, and Dwarikesh Sugar

Industires Ltd. versus Prem Heavy Engineering Works (P) Ltd.

& Another (1997) 6 SCC 450, this Court has no jurisdiction to

entertain this petition. As such, this petition is dismissed with liberty

reserved to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum, in

accordance with law. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand

disposed of.

(L. Narayana Swamy)

Chief Justice.

(Anoop Chitkara), Judge March 02, 2021 (ps)