Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:10913-DB Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 1964 of 2025 Petitioner :- Punjab National Bank Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjai Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Shri Sanjai Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Mohan Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel. 2. Instant writ petition has been filed for following reliefs:- "i. Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quashing the order dated 04.09.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 1st Kanpur in Misc. Case No. 5010 of 2021 (Punjab National Bank Vs M/s Trinity Informatics and others) U/s 14 of the 'The Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002', ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 1st Kanpur to allow the amendment application filed by petitioner bank on merits in Misc. Case No. 5010 of 2021 (Punjab National Bank Vs M/s Trinity Informatics and others) iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 1st Kanpur to handover the physical possession of mortgaged property to petitioner bank within stipulated period." 3. The petitioner had moved an application for taking possession of the secured asset of the guarantor, namely, Gurdeep Singh son of Shri S. Ram Singh, resident of 124/B/202 Govind Nagar, Kanpur, however, the opposite party arrayed in the application under Section 14 of The Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'SARFAESI Act') was the borrower M/s Trinity Informatics through its partners Shri Archit Chopra and Smt. Annu Chopra. When the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act was allowed on 20.01.2024 and the possession was to be taken from the guarantor, the petitioners realized that the petitioner had not arrayed the guarantor in the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that, thereafter, an amendment application was filed for impleading the guarantor and when that application was dismissed on 04.09.2024 the instant writ petition has been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that when the guarantor had not been impleaded as a party in the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, then, no coercive measures could be taken as are provided in the Act against the guarantor. 6. Shri Mohan Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel has submitted that when the petitioner had not arrayed the guarantor and the case had proceeded only against the borrower, then, it was a fatal mistake which could not be rectified by amending the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act after the order dated 20.01.2024 has been passed. Learned Standing Counsel also submits that there is no provision for moving an amendment application in the SARFAESI Act. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel, we are definitely of the view that, at this stage, when the order has already been passed on 20.01.2024, the guarantor could not now be impleaded. The mistake was such which could not be rectified by amendment/impleadment application. 8. No interference is thereafore warranted in the instant writ petition, writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 22.1.2025 Karan (Dr. Y.K. Srivastava, J.) (Siddhartha Varma, J.) Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad