Tajinder Singh Vs Bank of Baroda (Punjab Haryana High Court)
Punjab & Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition filed by borrower Tajinder Singh, who was challenging notices issued under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The petitioner had also contested warrants of possession issued by a Tehsildar. The court, without commenting on the merits of the case, ruled that it would not intervene, as the SARFAESI Act is a complete legal framework with built-in remedies.
Citing a series of Supreme Court precedents, including United Bank of India vs. Satyawati Tondon (2010), Phoenix ARC Private Limited vs. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir (2022), and PHR Invent Educational Society versus UCO Bank (2024), the High Court reinforced the principle that its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution should not be exercised when an effective alternative remedy is available. The court noted that the petitioner had not yet approached the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) or the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) for relief. Accordingly, the court directed the petitioner to pursue the appropriate statutory remedy before the DRT and disposed of the writ petition.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
1. The petitioner, who is a borrower, assails the notice(s) issued under Section 13(2) and 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short SARFAESI Act) and the warrants of possession issued by the Tehsildar, Rupnagar wherein the date for possession has been fixed for 07.08.2025 at 11:30 AM.
