Allahabad High Court
SARFARAZ AHMADversusAADHAR HOUSING FINANCE LTD AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The High Court held that it cannot interfere under Article 226 in matters of debt liabilities and enforcement actions under the SARFAESI Act, following the Supreme Court's decision in S. Shobha v. Muthoot Finance Ltd.
Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a certiorari to quash an auction notice dated 08.06.2022 issued by Aadhar Housing Finance Ltd. under the SARFAESI Act. The respondents argued that the High Court lacks jurisdiction to interfere in the enforcement actions of a private financial institution, citing the Supreme Court decision in S. Shobha v. Muthoot Finance Ltd. (2025). The Court examined the Supreme Court precedent, which directs High Courts to refrain from intervening in debt‑recovery matters under the SARFAESI Act. Consequently, the Court declined to grant the relief, but directed the petitioners to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act within four weeks, with a stay application, and stipulated timelines for disposal. The petition was therefore consigned to the records.
Issues considered
- Can a High Court entertain a writ petition under Article 226 to quash an auction notice issued under the SARFAESI Act?
- Is the High Court barred from interfering in debt‑recovery actions of a private financial institution under the SARFAESI Act?
- Should the petitioner approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act instead?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Article 226
- SARFAESI Act
- auction notice
- debt recovery
- High Court jurisdiction
- certiorari
- Debt Recovery Tribunal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 17628 of 2026
Sarfaraz Ahmad
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Aadhar Housing Finance Ltd And Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ashish Kumar Dubey, Rajesh Chandra
Dwivedi
Counsel for Respondent(s) :
Court No. - 1
HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.
HON'BLE INDRAJEET SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
2. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution,
petitioners have prayed for following relief:
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing to
stay the effect and operation of the auction notice dated 08.06.2022
issued by the respondent no. 1 putting on auction the property being Arazi
no. 258 M.I.G. Einuddinpur Tehsil Sadar,Einuddin Manjit Ke Pas
Allahabad pursuant to the loan account being 0000002700002060."
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
WRIC No. 17628 of 2026
2
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.
5. In view of the above, we decline to grant indulgence in the matter.
However, we still provide that in the event petitioners apply 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. Subject to aforesaid liberty, petition stands consigned to records.
(Indrajeet Shukla,J.) (Ajit Kumar,J.)
May 6, 2026
IrfanUddin
Digitally signed by :-
IRFAN UDDIN SIDDIKI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…