201 CWP-29105 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA SURINDER KAUR KOHLI AUTHORIZED OVERSEAS BANK AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. A.K. Khunger, for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Mr. R.Kartikeya, Advocate for respondent No.4. **** SHEEL NAGU, C.J. (Oral) 1. Challenge in this petition filed by the borrower is to notice issued u/s 13(2) dated issued u/s 13(4) dated and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the SARFAESI Act’) and also the consequential order dated 03.11.20 District Magistrate, SAS Nagar grounds. 2. The Apex Court, time and again has come down heavily on the High Courts for exercising power of judicial review in matters relating to SAFAESI of approaching 29105-2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision SURINDER KAUR KOHLI Versus AUTHORIZED OFFICER/ BRANCH MANAGER INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK AND OTHERS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Mr. A.K. Khunger, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Goel, Advocate for respondent Mr. R.Kartikeya, Advocate for respondent No.4. **** SHEEL NAGU, C.J. (Oral) Challenge in this petition filed by the borrower is to notice 13(2) dated 27.04.2022 (Annexure P 13(4) dated 01.07.2022 (Annexure P and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the SARFAESI Act’) and also the consequential order dated 03.11.2022 (Annexure P District Magistrate, SAS Nagar u/s 14 of SARFAESI Act, on various The Apex Court, time and again has come down heavily on the High Courts for exercising power of judicial review in matters relating to SAFAESI Act, especially where alternative statutory remedy approaching the DRT or DRAT is not -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-29105-2022 Date of Decision: 11.09.2025 ...Petitioner / BRANCH MANAGER INDIAN ...Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Goel, Advocate for respondent No.1-Bank. Mr. R.Kartikeya, Advocate for respondent No.4. Challenge in this petition filed by the borrower is to notice (Annexure P-11) as well as notice (Annexure P-12) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘the SARFAESI Act’) and also the (Annexure P-14) passed by the u/s 14 of SARFAESI Act, on various The Apex Court, time and again has come down heavily on the High Courts for exercising power of judicial review in matters Act, especially where alternative statutory remedy availed. [see Phoenix Arc KANIKA 2025.09.15 10:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 201 CWP-29105 Private Limited Vs. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir and others, (2022) 5 SCC 345; G. Vikram Kumar Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad and (2023) 14 SCC 159] 3. Without commenting on merits of this case, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy before the DRT and thereafter before the DRAT. 4. The provisions under Section 5 as well as Sect Limitation Act 1963, can be availed by the petitioner, to seek the relief of condonation, provided the same is reasonably explained with no element of mala fide. 5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. 6. The benefit of interim order of no coercive steps, shall continue till the petitioner avails the aforesaid liberty, provided the same is availed within a period of 30 working days. 11.09.2025 Kanika 29105-2022 Private Limited Vs. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir and others, (2022) 5 SCC 345; G. Vikram Kumar Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad and (2023) 14 SCC 159]. Without commenting on merits of this case, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy before the DRT and thereafter before the DRAT. The provisions under Section 5 as well as Sect Limitation Act 1963, can be availed by the petitioner, to seek the relief of condonation, provided the same is reasonably explained with no element of mala fide. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the aforesaid The benefit of interim order of no coercive steps, shall continue till the petitioner avails the aforesaid liberty, provided the same is availed within a period of 30 working days. Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No -2- Private Limited Vs. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir and others, (2022) 5 SCC 345; G. Vikram Kumar Vs. State Bank of Hyderabad and others, Without commenting on merits of this case, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedy before the The provisions under Section 5 as well as Section 29 of the Limitation Act 1963, can be availed by the petitioner, to seek the relief of condonation, provided the same is reasonably explained with no element Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the aforesaid The benefit of interim order of no coercive steps, shall continue till the petitioner avails the aforesaid liberty, provided the same is availed within a period of 30 working days. (SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No KANIKA 2025.09.15 10:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document