M/S Ryan Computer Coaching Center And Others v. Authorized Officer, Jana Small Finance Bank And Others

CWP-8206-2023 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-8206-2023 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.08.2025 M/S RYAN COMPUTER COACHING CENTER AND OTHERS ....Petitioners

Versus

AUTHORIZED OFFICER, JANA SMALL FINANCE BANK AND OTHERS

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY *****

Present:

Mr. Sahil Khunger, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Vipin Pal Yadav, Addl. Advocate General, Punjab. Er. Sandeep Suri, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.

***** SHEEL NAGU, C.J. (Oral) 1.

The petitioners, who are borrowers, have approached this Court challenging demand notice dated 09.06.2020 (Annexure P-7); possession notice dated 25.01.2022 (Annexure P-12); and order dated 27.03.2023 (Annexure P-13) issued u/s 14 of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short SARFAESI Act), on various grounds.

2.

The Apex Court has consistently held that High Courts should refrain from interfering under Article 226 of the Constitution in SARFAESI proceedings. The SARFAESI Act, 2002 is a complete code which not only provides for a detailed recovery mechanism but also remedies before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and thereafter, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT).

3.

From the averments in the petition, it does not appear that the petitioners have availed the statutory alternative remedy of approaching the DRT MOHIT GOYAL 2025.08.27 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-8206-2023 (O&M) and thereafter, before DRAT.

4.

In view of the above and the view of Apex Court in United Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tondon, (2010) AIR SC 3413 (Para 17, 27) ; Phoenix ARC Private Limited vs. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir and others, (2022) 5 SCC 345 (Paras 10, 21) ; PHR Invent Educational Society versus UCO Bank and others, 2024 (6)SCC 579 (Paras 22 to 41), this Court refrains from exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution. 5.

The petitioners are relegated to avail the appropriate statutory remedy under the SARFAESI Act before the DRT and thereafter before DRAT. In case the petitioners prefer an application under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act within a period of 30 days from today along with copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided on its own merits, without being dismissed on limitation alone.

6.

Since interim relief has already been granted in the present petition, the same will continue till the DRT takes fresh decision on the question of interim relief, provided the petitioners approach the DRT within 30 days, failing which the interim relief shall lose its effect. 7.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid liberty without commenting on merits, without cost. 8.

Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. (SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE (SANJIV BERRY) 19.08.2025 JUDGE mohit goyal Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No MOHIT GOYAL 2025.08.27 10:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document