HDB Financial Services Ltd. Vs District Magistrate-cum-Deputy Commissioner (Himachal Pradesh High Court)
Summary: he Himachal Pradesh High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by HDB Financial Services Ltd. challenging proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). The Division Bench comprising Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Sushil Kukreja observed that the petition had initially been entertained only because the parties jointly represented that they were attempting to settle their dispute amicably. This position was recorded in the earlier orders dated 2 September 2024 and 6 September 2024. However, no settlement was ultimately reached between the parties.
The Court held that since the petition questioned proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, it was not maintainable in view of the availability of an alternative and efficacious statutory remedy. The Bench relied on the Supreme Court decisions in Celir LLP v. Bafna Motors (Mumbai) Pvt. Ltd. and Others, AIR 2023 SC 4568, and PHR Invent Educational Society v. UCO Bank and Others, AIR 2024 SC 1893. Without undertaking an extended discussion of those authorities, the Court dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable, along with all pending applications, if any.
List of Cases Discussed
- Celir LLP Vs Bafna Motors (Mumbai) Pvt. Ltd. and Others, AIR 2023 SC 4568 (Supreme Court) — Cited by the High Court while holding that the writ petition challenging SARFAESI proceedings was not maintainable in view of the available alternative remedy.
- PHR Invent Educational Society Vs UCO Bank and Others, AIR 2024 SC 1893 (Supreme Court) — Cited alongside Celir LLP in support of the High Court’s decision to dismiss the writ petition on maintainability grounds.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
The instant petition was entertained only on the ground that it was jointly represented by the parties that they are making an endeavour to settle the matter amicably, as is borne out from order dated 02.09.2024 and thereafter order dated 06.09.2024. Evidently, no settlement has been arrived at between the parties.
2. Since the instant petition questions the proceedings under the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002, therefore, the same is not maintainable on the ground of availability of an alternate and efficacious remedy.
3. We need not multiply the authorities, suffice it to refer to the recent judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Celir LLP vs. Bafna Motors (Mumbai) Pvt. Ltd. and others, AIR 2023 SC 4568 and PHR Invent Educational Society vs. Uco Bank and others, AIR 2024 SC 1893.
4. Consequently, the instant petition is dismissed being not maintainable, so also the pending applications, if any.
Note: 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
