Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8033 (UTT)

VANDANA SHARMA v. PUNJAB AND SINDH BANK

WPMS/1779/2025 · 2025-06-20

Ravindra Maithani

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS D/18 WPMS No.1779 of 2025 With Interim Relief Application (IA) No.1 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. B.S. Koranga, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Vikas Kumar Guglani, Advocate for the petitioner. The challenge is made to the e- auction notice, issued by the respondents. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. It is the case of the petitioner that he had taken three loans; Rs.15,16,675, and Rs.8,53,491 for business purposes and had also taken Rs.13,90,000/-, as housing loan from the respondents bank. The petitioner could not pay the instalments. Thereafter, proceedings were initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (“the SARFAESI Act”) and now, auction proceedings have been initiated, which is impugned in this petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the property which is to be auctioned is the residential property of the petitioner; the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the amount. The perusal of the record reveals that, in fact, the petitioner had already filed a civil suit for the same cause. The proceedings have been initiated under the SARFAESI Act. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any action of the respondent bank, he has an alternate efficacious remedy under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner may pay some amount and make a representation to the respondents bank to give him some liberty to pay the remaining loan amount. The petitioner is free to approach the respondents bank with his offer to pay the amount due. This Court has no doubt, if such an offer is made, the respondents bank may consider it, in accordance with law. With these observation, the petition stands disposed of. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 20.06.2025 Sanjay SANJAY KANOJIA Digitally signed by SANJAY KANOJIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=e50e50b49596520698eff87e0a08bbd50 4686df4d1afc60f54a287831dec46fe, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=26EEB7122ED0DD23233A255DD8 EC450A84B515A087CAEFD1B3179A7DEAE40699, cn=SANJAY KANOJIA Date: 2025.06.20 17:30:04 +05'30'