ASHWANI KUMAR CHAUHAN AND ANOTHER v. UNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS
WRIC/18013/2026 · 2026-05-06
Ajit Kumar, Indrajeet Shukla
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4115 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4115 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 18013 of 2026 Court No. - 1 HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Sri Sanjay Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Manish Trivedi, learned counsel for the respondent bank and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. 2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has prayed for following reliefs :
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned notice dated 26.10.2023 under section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 issued by Respondent no. 3 (Annexure no.1 to this writ petition)."
3. Per contra, it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that the respondent financial institution being a private Bank, this Court may not like to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution in the light of the judgement in the case of S. Shobha vs. Muthoot Finance Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 177. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the relief claimed in this petition and also the judgement in the case of S. Shobha vs. Muthoot Finance Ltd. (supra) in which the Supreme Court has held that the High Courts should refrain themselves from interfering in matters of debt liabilities and the consequential action taken by such financial institutions under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short the 'SARFAESI Act, 2002') by invoking extraordinary jurisdictional Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rakesh Kumar, Sanjay Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., C.S.C., Manish Trivedi Ashwani Kumar Chauhan And Another .....Petitioner(s) Union Of India And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
power under Article 226 of the Constitution. 5. In view of the above, we decline to grant indulgence in the matter. However, we still provide that in the event petitioner applies before the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act, 2002 within a period of four weeks from today along with stay application and if he does so, the said application shall be considered after putting the bank to notice and dispose of the same within a further period of four weeks thereafter and thereafter securitization application itself shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible preferably within a further period of three months. 6.
6. Subject to aforesaid liberty, petition stands consigned to records. May 7, 2026 Atmesh WRIC No. 18013 of 2026 2 (Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ATMESH KESARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad