BABLI v. CAN FIN HOMES LTD AND OTHERS CAN FIN HOMES LTD AND OTHERS
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-6375-2025 DATE OF DECISION: 06.03.2025 DATE OF DECISION: 06.03.2025 2025 126 BABLI Versus CAN FIN HOMES LTD AND OTHERS CAN FIN HOMES LTD AND OTHERS … Petitioner (s) ... Respondent(s)
Legal Reasoning
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Mr. Govind Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Present: Mr. Govind Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Govind Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Aman Arora, Advocate and Mr. Aman Arora, Advocate and Ms. Arti Aman Arora, Advocate for respondent No.1. Ms. Arti Aman Arora, Advocate for respondent No.1. Ms. Arti Aman Arora, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor General of India with Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor Mr. Dheeraj Jain, Senior Panel counsel for UOI. Mr. Dheeraj Jain, Senior Panel counsel for UOI. Mr. Dheeraj Jain, Senior Panel counsel for UOI. ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner along Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner along Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner along Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner along with her family members including her son had taken home loan for a sum of with her family members including her son had taken home loan for a sum of with her family members including her son had taken home loan for a sum of with her family members including her son had taken home loan for a sum of all the instalments till Rs.14 lakhs in September 2022. They had been repaying all the instalments till Rs.14 lakhs in September 2022. They had been repaying Rs.14 lakhs in September 2022. They had been repaying n December 2023, her son was arrested in a November 2023 but unfortunately in December 2023, her son was arrested in a n December 2023, her son was arrested in a November 2023 herefore, she could not pay the criminal case and suffered losses in business, therefore, she could not pay the herefore, she could not pay the criminal case and suffered losses in business The respondents had issued notice under Section 13 (2) of the instalments. The respondents had issued notice under Section 13 (2) of the The respondents had issued notice under Section 13 (2) of the The respondents had issued notice under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act for a sum of Rs.13,60,319/- on 03.05.2024. SARFAESI Act for a sum of Rs.13,60,319/ Learned counsel on 03.05.2024. Learned counsel further submits that he has filed a submits that he has filed a Securitization Application 5) Securitization Application (Annexure P-5) before the DRT-I II on 17.12.2024 and notice had been issued by the DRT II. The and notice had been issued by the DRT-II. The matter is now adjourned to 02.04.2025 but as the matter is now adjourned to 02.04.2025 due the DRT-II is not functioning due The respondents are want of Presiding Officer, it is unlikely to be taken up. The respondents are want of Presiding Officer, it is unlikely to be taken up. to want of Presiding Officer, it is unlikely to be taken up. on taking possession of the sole residential house comprising 35 square yards on taking possession of the sole residential house comprising 35 square yards taking possession of the sole residential house comprising 35 square yards 07.03.2025 on 07.03.2025 on 07.03.2025. He submits that the petitioner may be protected till the petitioner may be protected till II resumes its functioning. the DRT-II resumes its functioning. 2. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 Learned counsel for been No.1 submits that auction has been initiated by the respondent/Bank in terms of the provisions of the Securitization initiated by the respondent/Bank in terms of the provisions of the Securitization initiated by the respondent/Bank in terms of the provisions of the Securitization initiated by the respondent/Bank in terms of the provisions of the Securitization the petitioner has not paid the outstanding amount. Act as the petitioner has not paid the outstanding amount. the petitioner has not paid the outstanding amount. SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.03.07 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-6375-2025 2025 -2- 3. 4. Heard. Heard. It is settled law that the petitioner cannot be left remediless It is settled law that the petitioner cannot be left remediless It is settled law that the petitioner cannot be left remediless It is settled law that the petitioner cannot be left remediless especially when the same has been provided by a Statute. We also draw our especially when the same has been provided by a Statute. We also draw our especially when the same has been provided by a Statute. We also draw our especially when the same has been provided by a Statute. We also draw our support from the order of the Supreme Court dated 16.12.2021 in the case of support from the order of the Supreme Court dated 16.12.2021 in the case of support from the order of the Supreme Court dated 16.12.2021 in the case of support from the order of the Supreme Court dated 16.12.2021 in the case of Special Leave uncil of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Union of India’ Special Leave ‘State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Union of India’ uncil of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Union of India’ Petition (C) No.10911/2021. Relevant extract is reproduced hereinbelow: Petition (C) No.10911/2021 Relevant extract is reproduced hereinbelow:- “13. “13. With a view to resolve the problem being faced by the With a view to resolve the problem being faced by the With a view to resolve the problem being faced by the arrangement, we parties, for the time being and purely as a stopgap arrangement, we parties, for the time being and purely as a stopgap parties, for the time being and purely as a stopgap request the concerned High Court(s) to entertain the matters falling request the concerned High Court(s) to entertain the matters falling request the concerned High Court(s) to entertain the matters falling request the concerned High Court(s) to entertain the matters falling within the jurisdiction of DRTs and DRATs under Article 226 of the within the jurisdiction of DRTs and DRATs under Article 226 of the within the jurisdiction of DRTs and DRATs under Article 226 of the within the jurisdiction of DRTs and DRATs under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, till further orders. Constitution of India, till further orders. Constitution of India, till further orders. 14. We make it clear that once the Tribunal(s) is/are consti tuted, We make it clear that once the Tribunal(s) is/are constituted, the matters can be relegated to the Tribunals by the High Court(s).” the matters can be relegated to the Tribunals by the High Court(s).” the matters can be relegated to the Tribunals by the High Court(s).” the matters can be relegated to the Tribunals by the High Court(s).” 5. functional, it would be in the interest As DRT-II is stated to be non-functional, it would be in the interest functional, it would be in the interest As DRT II resumes its of justice, if the petitioner is protected for some time till the DRT-II resumes its of justice, if the petitioner is protected for some time till the DRT of justice, if the petitioner is protected for some time till the DRT functioning. 6. t this juncture, Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor General of At this juncture, Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor General of t this juncture, Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor General of t this juncture, Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor General of II to India submits that the proposal for extending the additional charge of DRT-II to India submits that the proposal for extending the additional charge of DRT India submits that the proposal for extending the additional charge of DRT I has been sent to the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC). DRT-I has been sent to the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC). I has been sent to the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC). 7. The petition is disposed of with the direction The petition is that no coercive disposed of with the direction that no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioner for a period of 15 days after the measures shall be taken against the petitioner for a period of 15 days after the measures shall be taken against the petitioner for a period of 15 days after the measures shall be taken against the petitioner for a period of 15 days after the II resumes its functioning. DRT-II resumes its functioning. 8. It is clarified that nothing observed hereinabove shall be It is clarified that construed nothing observed hereinabove shall be construed to have any bearing on the merits of the case. to have any bearing (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE 06.03.2025 SwarnjitS SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.03.07 10:32 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Whether speaking/reasoned Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Whether reportable : : Yes / No Yes / No Yes / No Yes / No