Bachint Singh v. State Bank Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 27527 of 2018 Decided on : 16.11.2018 Bachint Singh . . . Petitioner(s)

Versus

State Bank of India and others . . . Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL PRESENT: Mr. Jitender S. Chahal, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Pradeep Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Gaurav GoelRavi Sharma, Advocate for respondents No.1 to 3.

**** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (Oral) The petitioner by way of present petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeks quashing of order dated 01st April, 2017 (Annexure P-6), passed in SA No. 309 of 2015, which was changed into SA No. 139 of 2017, titled as, "Bachint Singh Vs. SBOP" was dismissed being premature. A further prayer for quashing of impugned notices dated 01.08.2015 and 12.10.2015 (appended as Annexures P-2 & P-4) under Section 13 (2) and 13(4) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 (in short 'the SARFAESI Act'). 2.

It was urged by learned counsel for the petitioner that the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Chandigarh (in short 'the 'DRT') while holding the petition premature had relied upon the judgment of Apex Court rendered in Standard Chatered Bank Vs. V. Nobel Kumar and others, (2013) 9 SCC 620. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act was maintainable and it was not sine-qua-non that the borrower was to lose the physical possession of the secured asset before invoking the JAWALA RAM 2018.11.19 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CWP No. 27527 of 2018 - 2 - jurisdiction of the DRT.

3.

The Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 10873 of 2018, titled as, "M/s Hindon Forge Pvt. Ltd. & another Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh through District Magistrate, Ghaziabad & another", decided on 01st November, 2018, while setting aside the judgment of the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in 'M/s Hindon Forge Pvt. Ltd. and another Vs. State of U.P. Through D.M. Ghaziabad and others' had held that the borrow/debter can approach the DRT under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act at the stage of possession notice.

4.

In view of the above, impugned order dated 01st April, 2017 (Annexure P-6) is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the DRT to decide the same afresh on merits in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the DRT on 17.12.2018.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE November 16, 2018 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JAWALA RAM 2018.11.19 16:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh