[2025:RJ-JP:740] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 26387/2018 Rajesh Gupta S/o Shri Pooran Chand Gupta, Aged About 50 Years, Proprietor, M/s. Ram Prasad Vijay Kumar Having Address At Gb-43, New Krishi Upaj Mandi Yard, Alwar (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus H.d.f.c. Bank Limited, Having Its Registered Office At Hdfc Bank House, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (West), Mumbai - 400013 (Maharashtra) And Regional Office At O-10A, Hdfc Bank House, Ashok Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur (Rajasthan) Present Address Hdfc Bank Ltd., Fourth Floor, Time Square Building, Central Spine, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan) And Branch Office At Shyam Tower, 21, Kailash Colony, Road No.2, Alwar - 301001 Through Its Manager. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Swadeep Singh Hora For Respondent(s) : Ms. Suruchi Kasliwal with Mr. Vikram Singh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN Order 07/01/2025 1. This petition is filed challenging award dated 26.11.2018 passed by Permanent Lok Adalat, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as ‘PLA’). 2. The relevant facts are that the petitioner availed a cash credit facility from the respondent-Bank. On failure to maintain financial discipline the account was declared Non-Performing Asset (for brevity 'NPA') on 29.01.2018. The petitioner on 08.07.2018 filed an application asking for the statement of account, loan agreement and other documents. On 17.09.2018, notice under [2025:RJ-JP:740] (2 of 3) [CW-26387/2018] Section 13(2) of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for brevity 'the SARFAESI Act') was issued and amount due was Rs.7,60,38,719/- as on 31.08.2018. 3. The petitioner instead of filing the objection under Section 13(3A) of the Act filed an application before PLA raising a grievance that documents asked for were not supplied and that an amount due as debit entry of Rs.47,37,800/- is wrongly added. On 29.10.2018, the respondent-Bank filed OA before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (for brevity 'the DRT'). Thereafter, on 12.11.2018 the petitioner filed objections to notice under Section 13(2). Upon dismissal of the application by the PLA, the present petition has been filed. 4. After hearing arguments at some length on 06.01.2025, following order was passed and is reproduced:- "1. During course of the arguments, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank submits that the documents asked for have been substantially supplied to the petitioner along with copy of the Original Application (for short ‘OA’) pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (for short ‘DRT’). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though majority of the documents have been supplied, some are still to be supplied to which learned counsel for respondent-Bank on instructions submits that if any further documents pertaining to the credit facility are asked for, the same would be provided. 3. Its an undisputed fact that the recovery proceedings are pending before the DRT and the second issue raised by the petitioner before Permanent Lok Adalat with regard to the amount due would be subject matter of the OA and is to be dealt by the DRT. [2025:RJ-JP:740] (3 of 3) [CW-26387/2018] 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage seeks time to have instructions. 5. Put up on 07.01.2025 at the top of the cause-list." 5. Learned counsel for petitioner on instructions submits that in view of statement made by learned counsel for Bank-respondent the grievance of non-supply of document as on date has been redressed and in case need so arises the remedy in accordance with law would be availed. 6. With regard to issue that amount due as shown by the Bank has been wrongly calculated is subject matter before the DRT in the OA filed by the Bank. The petitioner shall be at liberty to challenge the amount due and the calculation of the amount due at the appropriate stage before the DRT. 7. Since the dispute raised by the petitioner before PLA has been redressed the legal issue with regard to maintainability of the petition before PLA is kept open. 8. The petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all the issues before the appropriate forum and avail remedies in accordance with law for redressal of surviving grievances. 9. The petition is disposed of accordingly. (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Chandan/HS/149 Reportable: No