Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sharda Prasad And Others vs Aavas Financiers Ltd And Others on 10 September, 2024
Author: Anupinder Singh Grewal
Bench: Anupinder Singh Grewal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
114 CWP-22827-2024
2024
DATE OF DECISION: 10.09.2024
SHARDA PRASAD AND OTHERS ... Petitioner (s)
Versus
AAVAS FINANCIERS LTD AND OTHERS ... Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE
JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI
Present: Mr. Nihul Pratap Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.
ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL)
Learned counsel for the petitioners, inter alia, submits that the Learned petitioners hadd taken take a home loan for a total sum of Rs.40,50,000/ Rs.40,50,000/-.. Notice under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued for a sum of Rs.41,09,455/- on 06.02.2024.
06.02.2024. He further submits that petitioner No.1 is 74 years old and would be deprived of his sole residential hou house se where he is residing. The petitioners have preferred S.A. bearing No.1970 No.1970-2024 2024 before the DRT-II on 10.0 .09.2024 .2024 but the same is not likely to be listed due to non non--
functioning of DRT-II.
DRT He submits that petitioners may be protected till DRT DRT-II II resumes its functioning.
2. Heard.
3. It is settled law that the petitioner cannot be left remediless especially when the same has been provided by a Statute. We also draw our support from the order of the Supreme Court dated 16.12.2021 in the case of 'State Bar Council uncil of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Union of India' Special Leave Petition (C) No.10911/2021. SWARNJIT SINGH
No.10911/2021 Relevant extract is reproduced hereinbelow:
hereinbelow:-2024.09.10 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-22827-2024 -2-
"13. With a view to resolve the problem being faced by the parties, for the time being and purely as a stopgap arrangement, we request the concerned High Court(s) to entertain the matters falling within the jurisdiction of DRTs and DRATs under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, till further orders.
14. We make it clear that once the Tribunal(s) is/are constituted, the matters can be relegated to the Tribunals by the High Court(s)."
4. As DRT-II is stated to be non-functional, it would be in the interest of justice, if the petitioners are protected for some time till the DRT-II resumes its functioning.
5. The petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioners shall not be dispossessed for a period of 15 days after the DRT-II resumes its functioning. It is made clear that the petitioners shall not make any effort to delay the proceedings and would cure the defects in the application, if any, immediately.
6. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE 10.09.2024 SwarnjitS Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No SWARNJIT SINGH 2024.09.10 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document