HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 34621 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J. HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Maneesh Mehrotra learned counsel for the respondent bank. 2. Petitioners seek regularisation of his loan account. They claim default of only few equated monthly installments (EMIs). However, the respondents have recalled the entire loan. That decision of the bank is being questioned. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the bank had offered to accept the entire amount of Rs. 44,31,137/- together with due interest, in installments. 4. Since the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to dispute the correctness of the recovery being made and since the recovery has arisen in accordance with the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002, interference claimed in the present writ petition is declined. Leaving it open to the petitioners to avail statutory remedy, in accordance with law, writ petition is dismissed as no interference may be offered on merits of the dispute in face of such statutory remedy available in the context of the special Act and the obtaining law laid down by the Supreme Court. October 13, 2025 Faraz Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ajay Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : Maneesh Mehrotra (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.) M/S Wonder Foods And Another .....Petitioner(s) H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- FARAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad