2026:HHC:30107 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.  : 227 of 2025 Reserved on   :  06.05.2026 Decided on    : 22.07.2026 Uploaded on  : 22.07.2026 The Manager HP Agricultural & Rural Development Bank, Branch Office Rampur & Anr. …Petitioners Versus Prakash Singh …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Hamender Singh Chandel, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr.   Daleep   Singh   Kaith, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge The petitioners have filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the judgment   dated   23.12.2024,   passed   by   the   Court   of learned   Additional   District   Judge,   Kinnaur   District   at Rampur Bushahr, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the first appellate  Court’), in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 08 of 2024, titled   as   “Prakash   Singh   Versus   The   Manager   HP Agricultural and Rural Development Bank & Anr.”. 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:30107 2. By way of the judgment dated 23.12.2024, the learned   first   appellate   Court   has   allowed   the   appeal preferred by respondent Prakash Singh, against the order dated   04.07.2024,   passed   by   the   learned   Senior   Civil Judge, Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’), in CMA No. 133/2021, titled as “Prakash Singh Versus The Manager HP Agricultural and Rural Development Bank & Anr.” 3. By   way   of   the   order   dated   04.07.2024,   the learned trial Court has dismissed the application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC, filed by respondent Prakash Singh, in the above titled Civil Suit. 4. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the present  lis,  are,   hereinafter   referred   to,   in   the   same manner, as were, referred to, by the learned trial Court. 5. Facts in brief, as borne out from the documents annexed with the petition, may be summed up, as under:­ 5.1 Plaintiff   Prakash   Singh   has   filed   a   suit   for permanent   prohibitory   injunction   restraining   the defendants   from   auctioning,   alienating,   transferring   or creating any charge or encumbrance over the land bearing Khewat No. 49/48, Khatauni No. 112/112 to 114/114 and 3 2026:HHC:30107 Khasra Nos. 544, 550, 587, 741, 742, 743, 776, 777, 778, 953, 954, 146, 549, 779, 978, 979, 1111, 474, 515, 670, 780, 950, 952, 980, 982, 985, 986, 993, 1078, 1080, 1082, 1143, total measuring 03­31­93 hec. and 1/12th share of the plaintiff, as mentioned in the sale order, issued by the defendant   bank   i.e.   00­27­77   hec. situated   in   Revenue Village Koti, Tehsil Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the suit land’). 5.2 According   to   the   plaintiff,   he   is   having   1/12 share in the suit land and he is recorded as owner in all the   above   khasra   numbers. In   the   suit   land,   other persons, namely Hari Chand, Rattan Dass, Parkash Singh, Sher Singh, Ram Kali, Thakur Dassi, Mun Dassi, Chanju, Ganga Ram, Chatar Singh, Rita Devi and Sheela Devi have also been recorded as co­sharers. 5.3 It is his further case that he had obtained a loan   of   Rs. 1,50,000/­   from   the   defendant   bank,   after mortgaging his share in the suit land in the year 2012, for the construction of irrigation tank. He has repaid a sum of Rs. 80,000/­ approximately, towards the loan amount, but, the   bank   officials   are   not   providing   the   statement   of accounts. The   plaintiff   could   not   repay   the   entire   loan 4 2026:HHC:30107 amount, as, his irrigation tank damaged due to leakage. According   to   the   plaintiff,   his   dwelling   house   is   also situated over the suit land and in case, defendants would succeed   in   selling   the   land,   then   irreparable   loss   and injury would be caused to him. 5.4 It is the further case of the plaintiff that as per the   policy   of   the   government,   agricultural   land   of   the poor/small land owners, cannot be auctioned by the bank. Moreover, the suit land is stated to be joint. 5.5. It   is   the   further   case   of   plaintiff   that   on 14.09.2021, when he had visited the branch of defendant Bank to obtain the statement of accounts and for making a request for One Time Settlement, as per the policy of the Government,   then,   the   bank   officials   used   the   abusive language   and   threatened   the   plaintiff   with   dire consequences. 5.6 It is his further case that the defendant Bank has also instituted a case under Section 138 of N.I. Act, in the year 2018, on the basis of blank cheque, which was obtained as security from plaintiff by filling amount of Rs. 1,00,000/­, whereas,  plaintiff  had already  deposited  Rs. 50,000/­ in the bank, in the month of August, 2018. 5 2026:HHC:30107 5.7 On the basis of above facts, the relief as prayed in the plaint, has been sought. 6. Along with the suit, application under Order 39 Rules   1   and   2   C.P.C.,   has   also   been   filed,   for   seeking interim   injunction,   during   the   pendency   of   the   suit   by directing the defendants not to auction the suit land. 7. When put to notice, the suit, as well as, the application have been contested. 7.1 In the written statement, the defendant Bank has   taken   preliminary   objections   that   the   suit   is   not maintainable for want of mandatory notice under Section 76 of the H.P. Co­operative Societies Act, 1968; Civil Court has no jurisdiction to try and decide the present suit, in view of clear bar of jurisdiction under Section 92 of the Act, suit is bad for non­joinder and mis­joinder of necessary parties,   plaintiff   is   estopped   to   file   and   maintain   the present suit due to his own acts and conduct; and he had not approached the Court with clean hands. 7.2 On merits, the suit has been contested, on the ground,   that   the   plaintiff   had   availed   the   loan   of   Rs. 1,50,000/­ from the bank and thereafter, he has given a solemn undertaking to repay the loan as per repayment 6 2026:HHC:30107 schedule. However, he has failed to repay the amount. As such, the defendant­bank has asserted their right to sell the mortgaged land, by way of public auction. According to the defendants, a sum of Rs. 1,72,467/­ is overdue. 7.3 On the similar grounds, the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C., have been contested. 8. The   learned   trial   Court   has   dismissed   the application, under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C., vide order dated   04.07.2024,   on   the   ground   that   the   defendants cannot be restrained from realizing the amount by taking recourse against the mortgaged property. 9. Against   the   dismissal   order,   the   plaintiff   has filed the appeal, before the learned first appellate Court, and   the   learned   first   appellate   Court,   vide   order   dated 23.12.2024, has allowed the appeal, by holding that the plaintiff is able to make out the three ingredients in his favour. As such, his application for interim injunction has been   allowed,   by   restraining   the   defendants   from auctioning,   alienating,   transferring,   mortgaging,   creating any charge or encumbrance over the suit land. 7 2026:HHC:30107 10. Feeling   aggrieved   from   the   said   order,   the defendants   have   filed   the   present   petition,   before   this Court. 11. Perusal of the record shows that the learned first appellate Court has allowed the appeal, preferred by the plaintiff, mainly on the basis of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme   Court   in   “Panduranga   Ganpati   Chaugale   Vs Vishwas Patil Murgud Sahakari Bank, AIR Online 2020 Supreme Court 527”. 12. By way of present petition, those findings have been assailed before this Court, mainly on the ground that the defendant­petitioner bank has been constituted as per the   provisions   of   the   Himachal   Pradesh   Co­operative Agriculture and Rural Development Banks Act, 1979 and the Act is a complete Code. As such, the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement   of   Security   Interest   Act,   2002,   (hereinafter referred   to   as   ‘the   SARFAESI   Act’)   do   not   apply   in   the present case. 13. The findings of the learned first appellate Court, have also been assailed on the ground that the learned first 8 2026:HHC:30107 appellate Court has not given the findings qua existence of three ingredients in favour of the plaintiff. 14. On the basis of the above facts, Mr. Hamender Singh  Chandel, Advocate,  appearing  for the  defendants­ petitioners,   has   prayed   that   the   appeal   may   kindly   be allowed by setting aside the order passed by the learned first appellate Court and the application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. may kindly be dismissed. 15. The prayer, so made in the petition, has been opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff on the ground that the learned first appellate Court has rightly passed the judgment after considering the factual and   legal   proposition,   in   the   present   case. As   such,   a prayer has been made to dismiss the petition. 16. The plaintiff has approached the learned trial Court, by way of the civil suit, with a prayer to restrain the defendants bank from auctioning, alienating, transferring, mortgaging, creating any charge or encumbrance over the suit land. Along with it, application for interim injunction has been filed. 17. In this case, the defendants have contested the suit,   as   well   as,   the   application,   by   filing   the   written 9 2026:HHC:30107 statement, as well as, the reply to the application, under Order   39   Rules   1   and   2   C.P.C.,   in   which,   preliminary objections   have   been   taken,   with   regard   to   the maintainability of the suit, on the basis of Section 76 of the HP Co­operative Societies Act, 1968, as well as, the bar created by Section 92 of the HP Co­operative Societies Act, 1968. 18. As   stated   above,   the   learned   trial   Court   has dismissed   the   application,   whereas,   the   learned   first appellate   Court   has   allowed   the   appeal,   in   view   of   the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Panduranga Ganpati Chaugale’s case (supra). In this case, it has been asserted by the learned counsel appearing for the defendants that as per Chapter VII, the bank has power to sell the property, which has been mortgaged with it, in case of default in repayment   of   the   loan   amount. Relevant   provisions   of Sections 26 to 37, of the HP Co­operative Agriculture and Rural   Development   Banks,   1979,   are   reproduced,   as under:­ “SALE OF MORTGAGED PROPERTY ­ 26. Power of sale when to be exercised.­ (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (4 of 1882) or any other   law   for   the   time   being   in   force,   where   a gehan   or   mortgage   or   hypothecation   has   been 10 2026:HHC:30107 created   or   executed   moveable   or   immoveable property in accordance with the provisions of sub­ section (1) of section 12 in favour of the Agriculture and   Rural   Development   Bank   or   a   Primary Agriculture   and   Rural   Development   Bank,   the Board   or   the   Committee   of   such   bank   or   any person authorised by the Board or such Committee shall, in case of default in the payment of sums due to the bank, have power, in addition to any other remedy available to the Primary Agriculture and Rural Development Bank to bring to sale the property   to   which   Gehan   or   mortgage   or hypothecation  relates without intervention  of the court. (2) No such power shall be exercised, unless and until­ (a)   the   Board   or   the   Committee   has previously   authorised   such   sale   in   the exercise of the power conferred on it by sub­ section (1), after hearing and deciding the objections, if any, of the person who created the   gehan   or   executed   the   mortgage   or hypothecation, or any other person having any interest in the security property; (b)   notice   in   writing   requiring   payment   of sums   due   to   the   Agriculture   and   Rural Development Bank or any part thereof, has been served upon­ (i) the person creating or executing the Gehan or mortgage or hypothecation; (ii) any person who has any interest or charge upon the property to which the Gehan   or   mortgage   or   hypothecation relates or any other right to redeem the same; (iii) any surety for the payment of the sums due to the Agriculture and Rural Development Bank or any part thereof; and (iv) any creditor of the person creating or   executing   the   Gehan   or   mortgage, who has in a suit for the administration of his estate, obtained a decree for sale of   the   property   to   which   Gehan   or mortgage or hypothecation relates; (c)   there   has  been   default   in   payment   of such sums due to the Agriculture and Rural Development   Bank   for   a   period   of   six months after service of the notice referred to in clause (b) : 11 2026:HHC:30107 Provided   that   the   objection   to   give   such notice   to   the   persons   mentioned   in   sub­ clauses   (ii)   and   (iv)   shall   be   confined   to cases  where  the  Board  or  the  Committee has notice of such claims; and (d) the Registrar, in case where the amount claimed by the State Bank is disputed, has certified that the amount claimed or lesser amount is due from the person creating or executing   the   gehan,   mortgage   or hypothecation. 27. Application for sale and manner of sale.­ (1) In exercise of the power of the sale conferred by section 26, the Board or any person duly authorised by the Board, may apply to the sale officer appointed in that behalf under section 35 to sell the 1 [property to which the Gehan,   mortgage   or   hypothecation   relates]   or   any   part thereof and such officer shall, after giving notice in writing to   all   the   persons   referred   to   in   section   26,   sell   such property, in the manner prescribed subject to any previous charge on the basis of registered deed. (2) The sale shall be by public auction and shall be held in  the village  where the  1 [property   to  which the Gehan, mortgage or hypothecation relates] is situated or at the nearest place of public resort if the sale officer is of the opinion   that   the   property   is   likely   to   be   sold   to   better advantage there. (3) The   Registrar   may   set   aside   a   sale   on   the application of the person creating or executing the Gehan, mortgage or hypothecation or any other person interested in   3   [the   property   to   which   the   Gehan,   mortgage   or hypothecation relates presented to him within 30 days of the sale, if in his opinion there has been an illegality or material irregularity in conducting the sale. (4) On the sale being set aside by the Registrar under sub­section   (3),   fresh   sale   shall   be   conducted   in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. 28. Application   to   set   aside   sale   on   deposit   and confirmation of sale in default or on dismissal of such application.­ (1) When a 4 [property to which the Gehan, mortgage or   hypothecation   relates]   has   been   sold   under   this Chapter, 5 [the person creating or executing the Gehan, mortgage or hypothecation] or any person having right or interest therein affected by the sale, may, at any time, within   thirty   days   from   the   date   of   sale,   apply   to   the Board to have the sale set aside on his depositing at the office of the State Bank,­ (a)   for   payment,   to   the   said   Bank,   the amount specified in the proclamation of sale 12 2026:HHC:30107 together with subsequent interest and the cost,   if   any,   incurred   by   the   Bank   in bringing the property to sale; and (b)   for   payment   to   the   purchaser,   a   sum equal to two percent of the purchase money. (2) If such deposit is made, the Board shall make an order setting aside the sale. (3) Where no application is made under sub­section (1) or where such application is made and disallowed, the Board   shall   apply   to   the   Registrar   to   make   an   order confirming the sale and no such officer confirming the sale, it shall become absolute. 29. Distribution of the proceeds of sale.­ (1) The   proceeds   of   every   sale   under   this   Chapter shall be applied by the sale officer, first in payment of all costs, charges and expenses properly incurred by him as incidental to the sale or any attempted sale determined in the   prescribed   manner;   secondly,   in   payment   of   all interest   due   on   account   of   the   Gehan   or   mortgage   or hypothecation in consequence whereof the property was sold; thirdly, in payment of the principal money due on account of the Gehan or mortgage or hypothecation and lastly, the residue,  if any, shall be paid to the person proving himself interested in the property sold, or, if there are more such persons than one, then to such persons according to their respective interests therein or upon their joint receipt. (2) (a) Any person dissatisfied with the decision of the sale officer in regard to the distribution of such residue may, within thirty days of the communication to him of such decision, institute a suit in a court to establish the right he claims. (b) The sale officer shall not distribute such residue until thirty days have elapsed from communication of his decision to all the persons concerned, or if a suit has been instituted within the said period of thirty days by any such person, until the suit is disposed of or otherwise than in accordance with the decision of the court therein. Explanation.­   In   this   sub­section   court   means   the   civil court which would have jurisdiction to entertain a suit to enforce   the   Gehan   or   mortgage   or   hypothecation   and within the limits of whose jurisdiction the property sold is situated. 30. Certificate to purchaser.­ Where a sale of property has   become   absolute,   the   sale   officer   shall   grant   a certificate specifying the property sold and the name of the person   who   at   the   time   of   the   sale   is   declared   to   be purchaser. Such certificate shall bear date, the day on which the sale became absolute. 31. Delivery of property to purchaser.­ 13 2026:HHC:30107 (1) Where the property sold is in the occupation of the 2   [the   person   creating   the   Gehan   or   executing   the mortgage   or   hypothecation]   or   of   some   person   on   his behalf or of some person claiming under a title other than a lease for a period not exceeding five years created by the   the   person   creating   the   Gehan   or   executing   the mortgage or hypothecation  subsequent to the Gehan or mortgage or hypothecation in favour of the State Bank and a certificate in respect thereof has been  granted under section 30, the Collector shall, on the application of the purchaser,   order   delivery   to   be   made   by   putting   such purchaser,   or   any   person,   whom,   he   may   appoint   to receive   delivery   on   his   behalf,   in   possession   of   the property. (2) Where the property sold is in the occupation of a tenant or other person entitled to occupy the same and certificate   in   respect   thereof   has   been   granted   under section 30, the Collector shall on the application of the purchaser and after notice to such tenant or other person, order   delivery   to   be   made   by   affixing   a   copy   of   the certificate   of   sale   in   some   conspicuous   place   on   the property and proclaiming to the occupant by beat of drum or other customary mode at some convenient place that the interest of the person creating the Gehan or executing the mortgage or hypothecation has been transferred to the purchaser. (3) In regard to the cases dealt within the sub­sections (1) and (2) the provisions of rules 97 to 103 of Order XXI of the First Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), shall, Mutatis Mutandis and so far as may be, apply. 32. Right   of   Agriculture   and   Rural   Development Bank   to   purchase   the   property   at   sale.­ Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, including a law imposing a ceiling on agricultural holdings, it shall be lawful for the Agriculture and Rural Development Bank to purchase any property sold under this Chapter and the property so purchased shall be disposed of by such Bank by sale within such period as may be fixed by the Board. 33. Appointment of receiver and his powers.­ (1) The Board may, on its own motion, or in the case of Gehan, mortgage or hypothecation executed in favour of Agriculture   and   Rural   Development   Banks   on   the application   of   such   banks   and   under   circumstances   in which the power of sale conferred by section 26, may be exercised, appoint in writing a receiver of the produce and income   of   the   property   or   any   part   thereof   and   such receiver shall be entitled either to take possession of the property or collect its produce and income, as the case 14 2026:HHC:30107 may be, to retain out of any money realised by him his expenses of management including his remuneration,  if any, as fixed by the Board, and to apply the balance in accordance with the provisions of sub­section (8) of section 69­A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. (2) A receiver appointed under sub­section (1) may, for sufficient cause and on application made by the person who   created   the   Gahen   or   executed   the   mortgage   or hypothecation, as the case may be, removed by the Board. (3) A vacancy in the office of the receiver may be filled up by the Board. (4) Nothing in this section shall empower the Board to appoint   receiver   where   the   property   is   already   in   the possession of a receiver appointed by a civil court. 34. Title of purchaser not to be impeached on the ground of irregularity etc.­ When a sale purported to have been made in exercise of the power of sale given by section 26 has been confirmed under sub­section (3) of section   28,   the   title   of   the   purchaser   shall   not   be impeachable on the ground that no case had arisen to authorise the sale or that due notice was not given or that the   power   was   otherwise   improperly   or   irregularly exercised but any person damnified by an unauthorised or improper or irregular exercise of the power shall have his remedy   in   damages   against   the   Agriculture   and   Rural Development Bank. 35. Appointment   of   sale   officers.­   The   State Government may appoint any officer to be a sale officer for the purpose of conducting sales under this Chapter. 36. Recovery of loans on certificate by Registrar.­ (1) Without prejudice to any other remedy available to the   Agriculture   and   Rural   Development   Bank]   for recoveries of arrears of any sum advanced by it to any of its members and on its furnishing a statement of accounts in respect of the arrears, the Registrar may, after making such enquiries as he deems fit, grant a certificate for the recovery   of   the   amount   stated   therein   to   be   due   as arrears. (2) A certificate by the Registrar under sub­section (1) shall be final and conclusive as to the arrear due. The arrears   stated   to   be   due   therein   shall   be   recoverable according to the law for the time being in force for the recovery of arrears of land revenue. (3) It   shall   be   lawful   for   the   Collector   to   take   any precautionary measures provided in the law for the time being in force, for the recovery of arrears of land revenue until   the   arrears   due   to   the   Agriculture   and   Rural Development   Bank   together   with   interest   and   any incidental charges incurred in the recovery of such arrears 15 2026:HHC:30107 are paid or security of such arrears is furnished to the satisfaction of the Registrar. (4) It shall be competent for the Registrar or a person authorised   by   him   in   this   behalf   to   direct   conditional attachment of the property of the person who has created Gehan or executed the mortgage or hypothecation until the arrears   due   to   the   Agriculture   and   Rural   Development Bank together with interest and any incidental charges incurred in recovery of such arrears, are paid or security for   payment   of   such   arrears,   is   furnished   to   the satisfaction of the Registrar and the provisions of section 74 of the Himachal Pradesh Co­operative Societies Act, 1968,   shall   apply   mutatis   mutandis   to   conditional attachment of any property made or to be made under this section. 37. Collector  to  make recoveries during  a certain period.­ (1) During such period as the State Government may by general or special order notify in the Official Gazette, it shall be competent for the Collector, on application being made to him in that behalf by the Agriculture and Rural Development   Bank,   to   recover   all   sums   due   to   the Agriculture  and  Rural  Development   Bank  (including  the cost of such recovery). 2. Any   amount   due   to   the   Agriculture   and   Rural Development Bank shall be recoverable by the Collector or any officer specially authorised by the Collector in this behalf, in all or any of the following modes, namely:­ (a) from the borrower­as if they were arrears of land revenue due by him; (b) out of the land for the benefit of which the loan has been granted as if they were arrears of land revenue due in respect of that land; (c) from a surety (if any) ­as if they were arrears of land revenue due by him; (d) out of the property comprised in the collateral security (if any) according to the procedure for the realisation   of   land   revenue   by   the   sale   of immovable property other than the land on which the revenue is due.” 19. On the basis of above provisions, it has been argued   that   the   HP   Co­operative   Agriculture   and   Rural Development Banks Act, 1979, is a complete Code, and as such, the provisions of SARFAESI Act are not applicable, in 16 2026:HHC:30107 the present case. Said submission of learned counsel for the defendants bank is not liable to be accepted, in view of the decision in Panduranga Ganpati Chaugale’s  case, as in the said case, Constitutional Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court   has   categorically   held   that   the   bank/banking companies under SARFAESI Act, includes all Co­operative Banks,   whether   registered   under   State   Legislation   or otherwise. Relevant paragraphs 122, 123, 124, 125 and 142.3 of the judgment, as reproduced, as under:­ “122. The co operative banks, which are governed by the BR Act, 1949 , are involved in banking activities within the meaning of Section 5(b) thereof. They accept money from the public, repayable on demand or otherwise and withdrawal by cheque, draft, order or otherwise. Merely by the fact that lending of money is limited to members, they cannot be said to be out of the purview of banking. They perform commercial functions. A society shall receive deposits and loans from members and other persons. They give loans also, and it is their primary function. Thus, they are covered under 'banking' in List I Entry 45. 123. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of appellants argued that securitisation is not a banking business. The SARFAESI Act is to regulate securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets. Emphasis was laid on the financial assets and financial assistance. The definition of 'debt' in Section 2(1)(ha) of the SARFAESI Act is the same as defined in Section 2(g) of the RDB Act, 1993, the 'debt' is defined as any liability which is claimed as due during any business activity undertaken by the bank or the financial institution. In our opinion, the submission ignores and overlooks the purpose of the SARFAESI Act, i.e., enforcement of security interest, and that is precisely sought to be achieved by Section 13 without the intervention of the court. Since the activity of a cooperative bank is banking regulated by the law enacted within the relatable Entry 45 of List I, we find no reason as to why the Parliament lacked the competence to enact the SARFAESI Act and to provide a procedure for the speedy recovery of dues. The SARFAESI Act also covers the activities undertaken by the cooperative banks. The cooperative banks are doing banking business under Section 5(b) of the BR Act, 1949, and the exclusion of the cooperative societies from Entry 43 of List I, does not have any bearing regarding the interpretation of List I Entry 45. 17 2026:HHC:30107 124. Even assuming for the time being that definition of 'bank' in Section 5(c) of the BR Act, 1949 did not cover the cooperative banks; the expression 'bank' has been defined in the SARFAESI Act under Section 2(1)(c), and the provisions contained in Section 2(1)(c)(v) authorises the Central Government to specify 'such other bank' for that Act. Thus, the notification issued on 28.1.2003 notifying 'co operative bank' as the 'bank' is covered by Entry 45 of List I as they are regulated by the BR Act, 1949, and the RBI Act. For the 'banking' activity under Entry 45 of List I, the Parliament had the power to enact such a provision defining 'bank' to authorise and prescribe the recovery procedure for such a bank as provided in Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act; However, we are of the view that cooperative societies/banks stand included by incorporation in Section 5(1)(c) of the BR Act and the notification was issued ex abundanti cautela. By virtue of Section 56(a), cooperative banks, as defined in Section 56(cci) of the BR Act, 1949, are included in Section 5(1)(c). Similarly, multiState cooperative banks were also covered. 125. The earlier procedure for recovery of dues was differently provided for general banks and the cooperative banks through the Civil Court or Tribunal. In the SARFAESI Act, a procedure has been prescribed under Section 13 without the intervention of the court/tribunal to keep pace with the time. Thus, the malady of inordinate delay with which the order of civil court suffered as well as of the cooperative tribunals or summary procedure under the Co operative Societies Act, was sought to be redressed. Apart from that, it is permissible for the Parliament to enact the law to provide recovery procedures for bank dues that have been done by providing speedy recovery of secured interest without intervention of the court/tribunal. 142.3. (3)(a) The cooperative banks under the State legislation and multi-State cooperative banks are “banks” under Section 2(1)(c) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The recovery is an essential part of banking; as such, the recovery procedure prescribed under Section 13 of the SARFAESI Act, a legislation relatable to Schedule VII List I Entry 45 to the Constitution of India, is applicable.” (Self emphasis supplied) 20. Even   otherwise,   the   defendants­bank   have approached   this   Court   under   Article   227   of   the Constitution of India, where the scope of interference is very less, as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case “K. 18 2026:HHC:30107 Valarmathi & Ors. Versus Kumaresan, 2025 INSC 606”. Relevant para 9 of the judgment, is reproduced, as under: “9. Essence   of   the   power   under   Article   227   being supervisory, it cannot be invoked to usurp the original jurisdiction of the court which it seeks to supervise. Nor can it be invoked to supplant a statutory legal remedy under   the   Civil   Procedure   Code,   1908. For   example, existence of appellate remedy under Section 96 of the Code   operates   as   a   near   total   bar   to   exercise   of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227.” 21. Even   otherwise,   in   a   recent   decision   in   case “Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises Ltd. & Anr. Verus B. Gurappa Naidu & Ors., 2026 INSC 434”, the scope of interference has again been explained by Hon’ble Supreme Court. Relevant paragraph 35 of the judgment, is reproduced, as under:­ “35. In   short,   the   principles   laid   down   in   the   above matters is as follows: a) The power of superintendence under Article 227 is not   to   be   exercised   unless   there   has   been   an   (a) unwarranted   assumption   of   jurisdiction,   not   vested   in Court or tribunal, or (b) gross abuse of jurisdiction or (c) an unjustifiable   refusal   to   exercise   jurisdiction   vested   in Courts or tribunals. b) It is also well settled that the High Court while acting under this Article cannot exercise its power as an appellate court or substitute its own judgment in place of that of the subordinate court to correct an error, which is not apparent on the face of the record. c) The High Court exercising supervisory jurisdiction does not act as a court of first appeal to reappreciate, reweigh   the   evidence   or   facts   upon   which   the determination   under   challenge   is   based. Supervisory jurisdiction is not to correct every error of fact or even a legal flaw when the final finding is justified or can be supported. The High Court is not to substitute its own decision on facts and conclusion, for that of the inferior court or tribunal.” 19 2026:HHC:30107 22. The learned counsel for the defendants  bank could not point out anything, from which, it can be inferred that   the   learned   first   appellate   Court   has   exercised   its jurisdiction   irregularly,   which   warrants   interference,   by this Court. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. 23. Any   of   the   observations,   made   hereinabove, shall not be taken, as an expression of opinion, on the merits of the case, as these observations are confined, only to the disposal of the present petition. 24. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of. (Virender Singh) 22nd July, 2026 Judge (Pramod Kumar)