Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manoj And Others vs Smfg India Home Finance Company Ltd And ... on 4 March, 2025
Author: Anupinder Singh Grewal
Bench: Anupinder Singh Grewal
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:030110-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
115 CWP-6075-2025.
Date of Decision: 04.03.2025.
Manoj and others ....Petitioners.
VERSUS
SMFG India and another ....Respondents.
***
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA
---
Present: Mr. Namit Khurana, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor General of India with
Mr. Dheeraj Jain, Senior Panel Counsel for Union of India.
****
ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have preferred a Securitization Application No.124 of 2025 which is pending adjudication before the DRT-II. However, the same is not being heard due to non-functioning of DRT-II. He submits that petitioners may be protected till the DRT-II resumes its functioning.
2. Heard.
3. It is settled law that the petitioners 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 of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Union of India' Special Leave Petition (C) No.10911/2021. Relevant extract is reproduced hereinbelow:-
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 05-03-2025 04:31:01 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:030110-DB CWP-6075-2025 -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. At this juncture, Mr. Satya Pal Jain, learned Additional Solicitor General of India submits that the proposal for extending the additional charge of DRT-II to DRT-I has been sent to the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC).
6. The petition is disposed of with a direction that no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioners for a period of 15 days after the DRT-II resumes its functioning.
(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE 04.03.2025 jitender Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes/ No Whether Reportable : Yes/ No 2 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 05-03-2025 04:31:02 :::