M/S Gourav Timber Industries And ... vs State Bank Of India
2023 Latest Caselaw 11803 P&H

                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:099840-DB




                                                       2023:PHHC:099840-DB
117           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                        CWP-14238-2023
                                  Date of Decision: August 03, 2023


M/s Gourav Timber Tirath Nagar and another                    ...... Petitioners

                           Versus

State Bank of India                                           ..... Respondent


CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
        HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE

Present:     Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

             Mr. Chandeep Singh, Advocate for the respondent.

                                  ****

LISA GILL, J.

1. Prayer in this petition is for quashing notice dated 23.03.2023

(Annexure P2) under Section 13(2) of Securitization and Reconstruction of

Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short -

'SARFAESI Act') as well as notice dated 25.05.2023 (Annexure P3) under

Section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that request for

regularization of the petitioners' account has been rejected on 06.07.2023.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to deny that

petitioners have an alternate efficacious remedy for redressal of the

grievance/s raised in this writ petition. It is a settled position of law that as a

general rule, there would be no interference by the High Court in exercise of

jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the wake

of availability of efficacious alternate remedy to the litigant, except in

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:099840-DB

exceptional circumstances. Gainful reference in this regard can be made to

the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union Bank of India v.

Satyawati Tandon and others, 2010(8) SCC 110; Varimadugu Obi

Reddy v. B. Sreenivasulu and others, 2023(1) R.C.R.(Civil) 34; M/s

South Indian bank Ltd. and others v. Naveen Mathew Philip and

another, 2023(2) RCR (Civil) 771 and Division Bench judgment of this

High Court in CWP No.10738 of 2022 (M/s Harinder Fabrics v. Shriram

City Union Finance Ltd.) decided on 04.05.2023. Hon'ble the Supreme

Court in the case of M/s South Indian Bank (supra) held as under:-

"13. ...... We may, however, reiterate the settled position of law on the interference of the High Court invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India in commercial matters, where an effective and efficacious alternative forum has been constituted through a statute.

xxx xxx xxx

14. A writ of certiorari is to be issued over a decision when the Court finds that the process does not conform to the law or statute. In other words, courts are not expected to substitute themselves with the decision-making authority while finding fault with the process along with the reasons assigned. Such a writ is not expected to be issued to remedy all violations.

xxx xxx xxx xxx

15. The object and reasons behind the Act 54of 2002 are very clear as observed by this Court in Mardia Chemicals Ltd. v. Union of India, (2004) 4 SCC 311. While it facilitates a faster and smoother mode of recovery sans any interference from the Court, it does provide a fair mechanism in the form of the Tribunal being manned by a legally trained mind. The Tribunal is clothed with a wide range or powers to set aside an illegal order and thereafter, grant consequential reliefs,

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:099840-DB

including re-possession and payment of compensation and costs. Section 17(1) of the SARFAESI Act gives an expansive meaning to the expression "any person", who could approach the Tribunal.

xxx xxx xxx

18. While doing so, we are conscious of the fact that the powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are rather wide but are required to be exercised only in extraordinary circumstances in matters pertaining to proceedings and adjudicatory scheme qua a statute, more so in commercial matters involving a lender and a borrower, when the legislature has provided for a specific mechanism for appropriate redressal."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to point out any

extraordinary or exceptional circumstances which call for interference in

exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

5. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above, this writ

petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to avail remedy/remedies

available to them in accordance with law.

                                                                (LISA GILL)
                                                                  JUDGE




                                                               (RITU TAGORE)
August 03, 2023                                                   JUDGE
rts

                   Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
                   Whether reportable: Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:099840-DB

3 of 3