Ishwar Singh And Another v. State Of Haryana And Others

CWP-16131-2026 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (197) CWP-16131-2026 Date of decision:- 27.05.2026 Ishwar Singh and another ... Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present:- Mr. Fateh Saini, Advocate and Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Deepak Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G., Haryana for respondents No.1 and 2.

Mr. Saurav Kumar Manchanda, Advocate (THROUGH V.C.) for respondent No.3-Bank **** SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

Upon instructions, counsel for Bank-respondent No.3 states that a total outstanding amount as on today is more than Rs.1 crore. He submits that petitioner's loan account was declared as NPA on 30.10.2022 and despite grant of repeated opportunities, petitioners have not cleared the outstanding amount. 2.

Counsel for the petitioners has disputed the outstanding amount and according to him, total amount due is approximately Rs.38,56,000/-. He states that petitioners are carrying a demand draft of Rs.20 lacs, which they are prepared to deposit with the Bank today itself. KAMAL SHARMA 2026.05.30 13:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh.

CWP-16131-2026 -23.

Countering him, counsel for the Bank submits that he has instructions to state that offer made by petitioners is not acceptable and a request for OTS already stands rejected.

4.

From the rival stand taken by the parties, it is evident that there is a dispute over the quantum of outstanding amount. This Court cannot go into this dispute in exercise of the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In any case, petitioners have an alternate remedy of approaching the Debts Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

5.

In view of the above, writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable. Liberty is granted to petitioners to take recourse to the alternate remedy. (SUVIR SEHGAL) JUDGE ( VIKAS SURI ) JUDGE 27.05.2026 Kamal Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No KAMAL SHARMA 2026.05.30 13:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

High Court, Sector-1, Chandigarh.