MS NEW DHASHMESH TRANSPORT v. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK
WPMS/834/2026 · 2026-04-06
Pankaj Purohit
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1909 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 1909 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:UHC:2387 1
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Misc. Single No. 834 of 2026 06 April, 2026 Ms New Dhashmesh Transport and Anr. --Petitioners Versus Punjab National Bank and Anr. --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:-
Mr. Ashutosh Posti, learned counsel for petitioners. Mr. Siddharth Jain, learned counsel for respondents- Bank.
Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)
This writ petition has been filed by petitioners challenging the auction notice dated 16.03.2026 (Annexure No.17) and subsequent publication dated 21.03.2026 (Annexure No.18) issued by respondent-Bank and further other ancillary reliefs.
2.
Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners are engaged in business of transportation as well as other allied business activities and are earning their livelihood therefrom. Petitioner No.1 had availed a Cash Credit Limit of Rs.125 Lakhs from respondent No.2 whereas petitioner No.2 had availed a Term Loan under the OMLS Scheme to the extent of Rs.51 Lakhs. He further submits that petitioners have been regular in operating and maintaining their loan accounts and there has been no willful default on their part.
3.
He further submitted that respondent-Bank has acted in clear violation and disregard to order dated 14.11.2022 passed by this Court, wherein, a
2026:UHC:2387 2 specific direction was issued to consider the case of petitioners for OTS/Rephasement after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing.
4.
Since, issues involved in the present writ petition have disputed questions of facts to be determined and the remedy available to petitioners is to file Securitization Application(SA) under Section 17 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short “the SARFAESI Act, 2002”) before the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), therefore, this Court doesn’t want to interfere in the present matter.
5.
In such view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to petitioners to avail the statutory remedy available to them under the SARFAESI Act, 2002, by filing an application before the DRT concerned within 15 days from today. However, keeping in view the
facts and circumstances of the case, only this much is provided that, for a period of 15 days from today, no auction of the property, i.e., the secured assets, shall be made by the respondents-Bank, so that the petitioners may avail the remedy before the DRT concerned.
6.
Pending application(s), if any, stands
disposed of.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
06.04.2026 PN