Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harmeet Singh vs Authorized Officer, Punjab ... on 16 November, 2023
CWP No. 8063 of 2021(0&M) 1
2023:PHHC:145531-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No.8063 of 2021(0&M)
Date of Decision: 16.11.2023
Harmeet Singh
sseeee Petitioner
Versus
Authorized Officer, Punjab National Bank and others
sevens Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE
Present: Ms. Jyoti Sareen, Advocate
for the petitioner (through video conferencing).
Mr. Gaurav Goel, Advocate
for the respondent-Bank.
Mr.Sukhdeep Parmar, Sr. DAG., Haryana,
eka
LISA GILL, J(Oral).
1. Prayer in this writ petition is for setting aside order dated
16.03.2021, Annexure P-20, passed by learned Debts Recovery Tribunal --II,
Chandigarh, whereby interim relief sought by the petitioner in SA No. 69 of
2021 filed by him has been declined.
2. Petitioner claims to be a tenant on the property that has been
mortgaged by respondent no.5 with the respondent-Bank. It is stated that
tenancy was created in favour of petitioner prior to the mortgage.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any
ground to interfere in this matter as admittedly impugned order is an
appealable one in terms of Section 18 of the Securitization and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest
SANJAY KHAN
2023.11.23 09:29
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Act, 2002. Once an efficacious remedy is available to petitioners for
reddressal of their grievance, no ground is carved out in the present writ
petition for exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India. No such exceptional or extraordinary circumstance has been pointed
out. At this stage, it is relevant to refer to judgment of Hon'ble the
Supreme Court in Varimadugu Obi Reddy v. B. Sreenivasulu and others,
2023(1) R.C.R.(Civil) 34 and 771, wherein it has been held as under:-
"34. In the instant case, although the respondent borrowers
initially approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal by filing an
application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, but
the order of the Tribunal indeed was appealable under Section
18 of the Act subject to the compliance of condition of pre-
deposit and without exhausting the statutory remedy of appeal,
the respondent borrowers approached the High Court by filing
the writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution. We
deprecate such practice of entertaining the writ application by
the High Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of
the Constitution without exhausting the alternative statutory
remedy available under the law. This circuitous route appears to
have been adopted to avoid the condition of pre-deposit
contemplated under 2™ proviso to Section 18 of the Act 2002."
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this
writ petition has been filed within period of limitation which was provided
for challenging order dated 16.03.2021, Annexure P-20 and that as interim
relief was granted on 08.04.2021, possession of the petitioner be protected
for two (02) weeks while affording liberty to the petitioner to challenge
order dated 16.03.2021, Annexure P-20 in terms of Section 18 of the
SARFAESIT Act.
5. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above, this writ
petition is dismissed with liberty to petitioner to avail statutory remedy/ies,
SANJAY KHAN
2023.11.23 09:29
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
as available to him in accordance with law along with appropriate
application seeking exclusion of period of delay, if any. In view of the fact
that interim relief granted by the Coordinate Bench on 08.04.2021, is
subsisting as on date, it is directed that the same shall enure for two (02)
weeks from receipt of certified copy of this order. However, continuation or
otherwise of interim protection after said two (02) weeks would be within
the realm of consideration by learned DRAT without being influenced by
any order which may have been passed in this writ petition.
( LISA GILL )
JUDGE
(RITU TAGORE)
November 16, 2023. JUDGE
s.khan
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No.
Whether reportable : Yes/No.
SANJAY KHAN
2023.11.23 09:29
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
