Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Narender Singh vs Dhfl Through Its Manager And Others on 24 January, 2024

Author: Lisa Gill

Bench: Lisa Gill

CWP No. 1614 of 2024(O&M) 1
2024:PHHC:009433-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

CWP No.1614 of 2024(0&M)
Date of Decision:24.01.2024

Narender Singh
cocees Petitioner
Versus

DHPFL through its Manager and others
sesees Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AMARJOT BHATTI

Present: Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.

eka
LISA GILL, J(Oral).

1. Prayer in this writ petition is for quashing possession notice dated 23.07.2018, Annexure P-2, under Section 13(4) of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'SARFAESI Act') and notice dated 10.01.2024, Annexure P-5, issued by respondents no.1 and 4, whereby delivery of possession of secured assets/property has been ordered in favour of respondent no.1.

2. It is submitted that petitioner and his parents had availed of home loan facility from respondent no.1-DHFL. Possession notice dated 23.07.2018, was issued in an illegal manner though loan was serviced regularly. Order under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act was passed on 21.01.2019, allegedly in an illegal manner again. Respondent no.2 as the successor of respondent no.1, unilaterally changed terms and conditions of SANJAY KHAN 2024.01.29 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh CWP No. 1614 of 2024 (O&M) 2 the loan, which is stated to be in contravention of applicable provisions of law as well as various Circulars issued by the Reserve Bank of India.

3. Having heard learned counsel for petitioner, we do not find any ground to interfere in this writ petition in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Relief claimed in this writ petition is admittedly qua a Private Non Banking Institution Company. It has been held by Phoenix ARC Private Limited vs. Vishwa Bharti Vidya Mandir and others, 2022 (1) RCR (Civil) 888, as under:-

"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, (1969) 1 SCC 585 and Ramesh Ahluwalia v. 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."

4. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above, this writ petition is dismissed with liberty to petitioner to avail the remedy(ies) available to him in accordance with law. There is no expression of opinion on the merits of the matter.

( LISA GILL ) JUDGE (AMARJOT BHATTI) January 24, 2024. JUDGE s.khan Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No. SANJAY KHAN 2024.01.29 16:39 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh