Mamta Rani v. Equitas Small Finance Bank Ldt And ORS

CWP-30350 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-30350 of 2025 Date of decision: 18.11.2025 MAMTA RANI ....Petitioner V/S EQUITAS SMALL FINANCE BANK LIMITED.

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

Present:

Mr. Lakhan Paul Garg Advocate for Mr. J.S. Gill, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Nitin Thatai, Advocate (through V.C.)and Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate for the respondent/Bank. **** SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral) 1.

The petitioner, who is a guarantor, has approached this Court challenging order dated 08.07.2025 (Annexure P-3) 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 petitioner has availed the statutory alternative remedy of approaching the DRT and/or DRAT.

4.

In view of above and the ratio laid down by Apex Court in United Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tondon, (2010) AIR SC 3413 (Para 17, 27) ; KAMAL GANDHI 2025.11.19 11:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP-30350 of 2025 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 petitioner is relegated to avail the appropriate statutory remedy under the SARFAESI Act before the DRT and thereafter before DRAT. In case the petitioner prefers 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.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid liberty without commenting on merits, without cost. (SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE 18.11.2025 Kamal Gandhi Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No KAMAL GANDHI 2025.11.19 11:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document