[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Springz And Another vs Indian Bank And Others on 22 May, 2026
Bench: Suvir Sehgal, Vikas Suri
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
115
CWP-15812-2026
Date of Decision: 22.05.2026
M/S SPRINGZ AND ANR
...Petitioners
Versus
INDIAN BANK AND ORS
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI
Present: Mr. Aalok Jagga, Advocate with
Mr. Harkirat S. Jagdev, Advocate and
Mr. A.P.S. Madaan, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Ms. Manjari Joshi, Advocate, for respondent No.1-Bank.
*****
SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)
1. Although, this matter has a chequered history, but for the
purpose of disposal of this writ petition, some basic facts deserve to be
noticed.
2. Petitioners approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) by
filing a Securitization Application (SA) assailing the proceedings initiated
by Indian Bank under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial
Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short,
'SARFAESI Act'). An order dated 21.04.2026, Annexure P-18, was passed
by DRT-III, whereby prayer for stay of SARFAESI proceedings was
rejected. Petitioners approached this Court by filing a writ petition (CWP-
12215-2026), which was dismissed as not maintainable on
22.04.2026, Annexure P-19, as petitioners had a remedy of filing an appeal
CWP-15812-2026 (2)
before Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT). Petitioners availed the
statutory remedy and by order dated 05.05.2026, Annexure P-21, DRAT
directed the petitioners to deposit 30% of Rs.2,49,31,772/- (i.e. amount
mentioned in the notice under section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act), as pre-
deposit within a period of 15 days for the entertainment of the appeal.
3. Mr. Jagga states that petitioners have already deposited demand
draft(s) amounting to Rs.30,00,000/- with the DRAT, which have been
encashed and insofar as the balance amount is concerned, he requests for
extension of time by about 25 days. He submits that the proceedings before
the DRAT have been deferred to 06.07.2026, but as the bank has issued a
possession notice on 05.05.2026, Annexure P-23, as well as a sale notice on
07.05.2026, Annexure P-24, for e-auction of the property on 30.05.2026,
there is an urgency in the matter. He has requested that DRAT be directed
to decide the appeal expeditiously.
4. Advance copy of the petition has been served upon Bank-
respondent No.1.
5. Ms. Manjari Joshi, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf
of Bank-respondent No.1. She has vehemently opposed both the prayers
made in the writ petition. She submits that petitioners are habitual defaulters
and despite grant of more than 2555 days, they have failed to deposit the
amount demanded under Section 13(2) of SARFAESI Act. She has placed
reliance upon the observations of the Supreme Court in Sidha Neelkanth
Paper Industries Private Limited and another vs Prudent ARC Limited
CWP-15812-2026 (3)
and others, 2023 SCC Online SC 12, to urge that no indulgence deserves to
be shown to the petitioners. It is also her assertion that appeal pending
before the DRAT has become infructuous as relief claimed is no longer
available to the petitioners.
6. We have heard counsel for the parties and considered their
respective submissions.
7. Petitioners have availed the statutory remedy as has been
provided under the SARFAESI Act by filing an appeal under Section 18
thereof. Proviso to Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act provides that an appeal
cannot be entertained until minimum pre-deposit of 25% of the debt due is
made. By virtue of order dated 05.05.2026 (Annexure P-21), DRAT has
directed the petitioners to deposit 30% of the amount claimed in notice
under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act and partial deposit has already
been made by the petitioners. This Court is, therefore, prima facie satisfied
with the bona fide of the petitioners and considers it to be a fit case to extend
the time for deposit of the balance amount. Accordingly, petitioners are
granted time till 15.06.2026 to make the balance deposit so as to complete
the requisite deposit of 30%, as directed by the DRAT in its order, Annexure
P-21.
8. This Court also finds substance in the second prayer made by
Mr. Jagga, counsel for the petitioners. Petitioners are pursuing the remedy
available to them under the statute. Respondent No.1-Bank is proceeding to
recover the amount due from them by taking appropriate steps, which are
legally permissible. It is in the interest of both the sides that till the time the
pleas raised by the borrowers are not determined, proceedings under the
CWP-15812-2026 (4)
SARFAESI Act should be stopped. In these circumstances, DRAT is
requested to decide the appeal and/or application for interim direction, if
any, instituted by the petitioners, on the date fixed, i.e. 06.07.2026 or on any
day as is convenient to it.
9. With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of.
10. It is clarified that respondent No.1-Bank shall not proceed to
take possession of the secured assets or to put them on sale till 06.07.2026,
provided petitioners make the balance deposit before the DRAT within the
time granted by this Court. It is further clarified that as this Court has not
examined the merits of the matter, DRAT shall decide the appeal and/or any
application moved by the petitioners, uninfluenced by any observation made
by this Court.
( SUVIR SEHGAL )
JUDGE
( VIKAS SURI )
May 22, 2026 JUDGE
harish
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
