Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Siyona Enterprises And Ors vs Shri Ram Finance Ltd on 6 September, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117577-DB
2023:PHHC:117577-DB
119 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-19348-2023
Date of Decision: September 06, 2023
M/S SIYONA ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS ..... Petitioners
Versus
SHRI RAM FINANCE LTD. .... Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE
Present: Mr. Deepam Raghav, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Harsh Chopra, Advocate for the respondent.
****
LISA GILL, J.
1. Prayer in this petition is for quashing notice dated 20.12.2021
(Annexure P3) 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 order dated 10.02.2023 (Annexure P4) passed
by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurugram under Section 14 of SARFAESI
Act.
2. This writ petition has admittedly been filed against the
respondent, which is a private Non-Banking Financial Institution, therefore,
no ground is made out for interference by the High Court in exercise of
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, especially
keeping in view the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Phoenix
ARC Private Limited versus Vishwa Bharti Vidya Mandir and others,
2022 (1) RCR (Civil) 888, wherein it has been held as under:-
" Even otherwise, it is required to be noted that a writ
petition against the private financial institution - ARC -
appellant herein under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117577-DB
against the proposed action/actions under Section 13(4) of
the SARFAESI Act can be said to be not maintainable. In the
present case, the ARC proposed to take action/actions under the
SARFAESI Act to recover the borrowed amount as a secured
creditor. The ARC as such cannot be said to be performing
public functions which are normally expected to be performed
by the State authorities. During the course of a commercial
transaction and under the contract, the bank/ARC lent the
money to the borrowers herein and therefore the said activity of
the bank/ARC cannot be said to be as performing a public
function which is normally expected to be performed by the
State authorities. If proceedings are initiated under the
SARFAESI Act and/or any proposed action is to be taken and
the borrower is aggrieved by any of the actions of the private
bank/bank/ARC, borrower has to avail the remedy under the
SARFAESI Act and no writ petition would lie and/or is
maintainable and/or entertainable. Therefore, decisions of this
Court in the cases of Praga Tools Corporation v. Shri C.A.
Imanual, (1969) 1 SCC 585 and Ramesh Ahluwalia v. State
of Punjab, (2012) 12 SCC 331 relied upon by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the borrowers are not of any
assistance to the borrowers."
3. Faced with the above, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks
to withdraw this petition with liberty to the petitioners to avail
remedy/remedies available to them in accordance with law.
4. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with
liberty as aforementioned.
(LISA GILL)
JUDGE
(RITU TAGORE)
September 06, 2023 JUDGE
rts
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117577-DB
2 of 2
