221 CWP-5433 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA M/S NARANG TRADING COMPANY THR0UGH ITS PROPRIETOR FATEH CHAND AND OTHERS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. Sharad Choudhary, for the petitioner Mr. Tajender Joshi, Advocate, Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate and Mr. Rampal Kohli, Advocate for respondent **** SHEEL NAGU, C.J. (Oral) 1. Rs. 5 lakh has been deposited account in compliance w has been placed on record as Annexure ‘X’. 2. The petitioners, who are borrowers/guarantors, have approached this Court challenging notice dated (Annexure P- Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short SARFAESI Act), issued u/s 13 (4) of SARFAESI Act, 3. The Apex Court has co 5433-2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: M/S NARANG TRADING COMPANY THR0UGH ITS PROPRIETOR FATEH CHAND AND OTHERS VERSUS INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Mr. Sharad Choudhary, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Tajender Joshi, Advocate, Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate and Mr. Rampal Kohli, Advocate for respondent-Bank. **** SHEEL NAGU, C.J. (Oral) Rs. 5 lakh has been deposited by the petitioner in the loan in compliance with the order dated has been placed on record as Annexure ‘X’. The petitioners, who are borrowers/guarantors, have approached this Court challenging notice dated -2) issued u/s 13(2) of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short SARFAESI Act), and possession notice dated 16.11.2022 (Annexure P issued u/s 13 (4) of SARFAESI Act, on various grounds. The Apex Court has consistently held that High Courts -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-5433-2023 Date of Decision:09.09.2025 M/S NARANG TRADING COMPANY THR0UGH ITS PROPRIETOR FATEH CHAND AND OTHERS ...Petitioners INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Advocate Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate and by the petitioner in the loan ith the order dated 21.08.2025. Copy of receipt The petitioners, who are borrowers/guarantors, have approached this Court challenging notice dated 31.08.2022 itisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short and possession notice dated 16.11.2022 (Annexure P-3) on various grounds. nsistently held that High Courts 31.08.2022 KANIKA 2025.09.11 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 221 CWP-5433 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 Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT). 4. From the averments in the petition, it does not appear that the petitioners have availed the statutory alternative remedy of approaching the DRT and thereafter, be 5. 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) ; Phoenix ARC Private Limited vs. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir and others, (2022) 5 SCC 345 (Paras 10, 21) Invent Educational Society versus UCO Bank and others, 2024 (6)SCC 579 (Paras 22 to 41), jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution. 6. The petitioners are relegated to avail the appropriate statutory remedy under the SARFAESI Act before the DRT and thereafter before DRAT. In case the petitioner 17 of SARFAESI Act within a period of 30 days from today copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided on its own merits, without being dismissed on limitation alone. 7. Interim relief, if granted, in the present petition, shall continue till DRT takes fresh decision on the petitioner relief shall lose its effect. It is made clear that if petitioners approach the 5433-2023 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). From the averments in the petition, it does not appear that the petitioners have availed the statutory alternative remedy of approaching the DRT and thereafter, before DRAT. 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) ; Phoenix ARC Private Limited vs. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir and others, (2022) 5 SCC 345 (Paras 10, 21) 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. The petitioners are relegated to avail the appropriate statutory remedy under the SARFAESI Act before the DRT and thereafter DRAT. In case the petitioners prefers an application under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act within a period of 30 days from today copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided on its own merits, without being dismissed on limitation alone. Interim relief, if granted, in the present petition, shall continue till DRT takes fresh decision on the question of interim relief, provided the petitioners approaches DRT within 30 days, failing which the interim relief shall lose its effect. It is made clear that if petitioners approach the -2- 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 Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and thereafter, Debts From the averments in the petition, it does not appear that the petitioners have availed the statutory alternative remedy of fore DRAT. 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) ; 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 this Court refrains from exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution. The petitioners are relegated to avail the appropriate statutory remedy under the SARFAESI Act before the DRT and thereafter 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. Interim relief, if granted, in the present petition, shall continue the question of interim relief, provided approaches DRT within 30 days, failing which the interim relief shall lose its effect. It is made clear that if petitioners approach the KANIKA 2025.09.11 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 221 CWP-5433 Tribunal within the prescribed stipulated time, then this orde prejudice the mind of Tribunal while deciding the question of interim relief, if admissible to the petitioner Tribunal shall decide the request for interim relief strictly on merits of the matter, without bei approached this Court or this Court having passed the present order. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid liberty without commenting on merits, without cost. 09.09.2025 Kanika 5433-2023 Tribunal within the prescribed stipulated time, then this orde prejudice the mind of Tribunal while deciding the question of interim relief, if admissible to the petitioners. We further make it clear that the Tribunal shall decide the request for interim relief strictly on merits of the matter, without being influenced by the fact of petitioner approached this Court or this Court having passed the present order. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid liberty without commenting on merits, without cost. Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No -3- Tribunal within the prescribed stipulated time, then this order shall not prejudice the mind of Tribunal while deciding the question of interim . We further make it clear that the Tribunal shall decide the request for interim relief strictly on merits of the ng influenced by the fact of petitioners having approached this Court or this Court having passed the present order. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with aforesaid liberty without commenting on merits, without cost. (SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No KANIKA 2025.09.11 10:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document