Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kulwant Kaur vs Punjab National Bank on 20 December, 2023
Author: Lisa Gill
Bench: Lisa Gill
SUNIL 2023.12.24 14:10 CWP-6766-2021 (O&M) 2023: PHHC:164231-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (130+241) CWP-6766-2021 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.12.2023 Kulwant Kaur ...Petitioner Versus Punjab National Bank ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RITU TAGORE Present: Mr. Amit Gupta, Advocate for the applicant/petitioner. Mr. Vinish Singla, Advocate for the non-applicant/respondent-Bank. oi oie 2K 3k LISA GILL, J (ORAL)
CM-15538-CWP-2023 Learned counsel for non-applicant/respondent does not raise any objection to recall of order dated 11.08.2023 whereby writ petition was dismissed in default and for non-prosecution.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, which is duly supported by affidavit of learned counsel for applicant/petitioner, same is allowed. Order dated 11.08.2023 is recalled. Writ petition is restored to its original number.
At request and with consent of learned counsel for parties, writ petition is taken up for hearing today itself.
CWP-6766-2021
1. Challenge in this writ petition is to sale notice dated 21.02.2021 (Annexure P-3) issued by respondent-Bank under Securitisation | attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document SUNIL 2023.12.24 14:10 CWP-6766-2021 (O&M) 2023: PHHC:164231-DB 2 and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'SARFAESI Act').
2. Learned counsel for petitioner argues that respondent-Bank, at the first instance, should proceed against properties of principal borrower which are sufficient for discharge of liability in question and it is only thereafter that property of petitioner, who is the guarantor of loan account in question should be touched especially when the said property is a residential property.
3. Learned counsel for respondent-Bank while raising preliminary objection regarding entertainability of writ petition submits that this writ petition is rendered infructuous as auction consequent to impugned sale notice dated 21.02.2021 (Annexure P-3) had failed. In a subsequent auction conducted on 15.03.2022, two out of four mortgaged properties were sold and possession of properties in question in the present writ petition had been taken much prior thereto. Furthermore, petitioner has approached the learned Debt Recovery Tribunal by way of filing Securitization Application, which is still pending. CWP No.7087 of 2021 filed by borrower was disposed of as infructuous on 11.08.2023 with liberty to borrower to raise all available pleas before the learned Debt Recovery Tribunal, Chandigarh.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that subsequent sale notice dated 29.11.2023 has been issued by respondent- Bank for auction of property in question on 20.12.2023 itself, therefore, present writ petition should be allowed.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. We do not find any ground whatsoever to interfere in this matter. It is a settled position that interference by High Court, in such like | attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document SUNIL 2023.12.24 14:10 CWP-6766-2021 (O&M) 2023: PHHC:164231-DB 3 matters has to be minimal and actuated only in extraordinary and exceptional circumstances. Gainful reference in this regard can be made to judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Union Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tandon and others, 2010 (8) SCC 110, Varimadugu Obi Reddy vs. B. Sreenivasulu and others, 2023 (1) R.C.R. (Civil) 34 and M/s South Indian Bank Ltd. and others vs. Naveen Mathew Philip and others, 2023 (2) R.C.R. (Civil) 771. Learned counsel for petitioner is unable to point out any extraordinary or exceptional circumstance which calls for interference by this Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
7. Plea raised by petitioner that it is the properties of principal borrower which should first be proceeded against, is devoid of any merit especially in view of definition of borrower as contained in Section 2(f) of SARFAESI Act. Moreover, all available pleas as have been raised in this writ petition can very well be raised before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
8. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above, writ petition is dismissed with liberty to petitioner to avail/pursue remedy(ies) available to her in accordance with law. There is no expression of opinion on merits of the matter.
9. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of accordingly.
(LISA GILL) JUDGE (RITU TAGORE) JUDGE December 20, 2023 Manpreet Whether speaking/reasoned ss :: Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No | attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document