Punjab-Haryana High Court
Naresh Kumar And Anr vs Iifl Home Finance Ltd And Anr on 19 January, 2024
Author: Lisa Gill
Bench: Lisa Gill
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:007204-DB
2024:PHHC:007044-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
109
CWP-1227-2024
Date of decision: 19.01.2024
Naresh Kumar and Anr.
...... Petitioners
V/S
IIFL Home Finance Ltd. and Anr.
..... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI
Present: Mr. S.S.Nain, Advocate for petitioners.
Mr. Vineet Sehgal, Advocate for respondents.
****
LISA GILL, J.(Oral)
1. Prayer in this writ petition is for setting aside notice dated
13.12.2023 issued by respondent No.2, pursuant to order dated 23.11.2023
passed by District Magistrate, Faridabad under Section 14 of Securitization
and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security
Interest Act (SARFAESI Act), 2002 Act.
2. Availing of loan facility by petitioners, is matter of record as is
the financial indiscipline for reasons as may be. Account of petitioners was
declared Non Performing Asset (NPA) on 04.08.2022 with an outstanding
of Rs.22,46,423/-. Notice(s) under Section 13(2) and 13(4) were issued on
27.08.2022 and 18.11.2022 respectively. Admittedly, petitioners have been
provided specific remedies for redressal of their grievance qua proceedings
initiated under SARFAESI Act. Moreover, relief claimed in this writ
petition is qua a Private Non Banking Home Finance Company.
Therefore, this writ petition in any case is not entertainable. Gainful
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:007204-DB
2024:PHHC:007044-DB
reference in this regard can be made to judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme
Court in Phoenix ARC Private Limited. Vs. Vishwa Bharati Vidya
Mandir and others, 2022 AIR (SC) 1045, has held as under:-
"12. 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 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
and others, (1969) 1 SCC 585 and Ramesh Ahluwalia
vs. 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."
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:007204-DB
2024:PHHC:007044-DB
3. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioners submits that
petitioners are ready and willing to deposit a sum of Rs.2 lakhs today and
outstanding amount within next three months.
4. Learned counsel for respondents submits that this is only a
method of trying to delay proceedings for taking possession which are
slated for today itself as there is an outstanding of over thirty lakhs against
petitioners. It is further submitted that in case petitioners do submit a
proposal for One Time Settlement (OTS), same can be considered even
after taking over of possession and in case OTS is arrived at, possession
can be restored on terms as agreed upon.
5. Keeping in view facts and circumstances as above, we do not
find any ground whatsoever to interfere at this stage. Accordingly, this writ
petition is dismissed with liberty to petitioners to avail remedy/remedies
available to them in accordance with law. It is always open to the parties to
arrive at any mutually acceptable settlement.
6. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(LISA GILL)
JUDGE
(AMARJOT BHATTI )
JUDGE
19.01.2024
Sunil Devi
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:007204-DB
3 of 3
