Allahabad High Court
BALVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
High Courts cannot interfere via Article 226 in enforcement actions taken by private banks under the SARFAESI Act.
Summary
The petitioner, Balvir Singh, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a certiorari to quash an order dated 10‑10‑2025 and a notice dated 24‑02‑2026 issued by a private bank under the SARFAESI Act. The petitioner argued that the High Court could intervene in the bank's enforcement actions. The respondents contended that, following the Supreme Court’s decision in S. Shobha v. Muthoot Finance Ltd., High Courts should not interfere with debt‑recovery measures taken under the SARFAESI Act. The Court examined the precedent and held that the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 does not extend to matters of debt liability under the SARFAESI Act. Consequently, the Court declined to grant the relief and directed the petitioner to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act. The petition was therefore dismissed and consigned to the records.
Issues considered
- Whether a High Court can exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 to quash orders and notices issued by a private bank under the SARFAESI Act.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Article 226
- SARFAESI Act
- Debt Recovery Tribunal
- High Court jurisdiction
- Certiorari
- Private bank
- Section 17
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 10322 of 2026
Balvir Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 4 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ram Chandra Solanki
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Amit Shukla, C.S.C.
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.
1. Heard Shri Ram Chandra Solanki, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Shri Amit Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent no.5.
2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution,
petitioner has prayed for following relief :-
"A writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the impugned order
dated 10.10.2025 passed by respondent no.2 (Annexure-1) in Case No.1166/2025 (Bajaj
Finance Ltd. Vs. M/s Krishna Enterprises Proprietor Balvir Singh and another) and
impugned notice dated 24.02.2026 issued by respondent no.3 (Annexure-2) in
compliance of order dated 10.10.2025."
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
Muthoot Finance (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 power under Article 226
of the Constitution.
WRIC No. 10322 of 2026
2
5. In view of the above, we decline to grant indulgence in the matter.
However, liberty rests with the petitioner to apply under Section 17 of the
SARFAESI Act, 2002 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, if so advised.
6. Subject to aforesaid liberty, petition stands consigned to records.
(Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
March 19, 2026
Shiv
Digitally signed by :-
SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…