This writ petition challenged the bank's possession of property under the SARFAESI Act. The petitioner alleged unlawful entry despite readiness to repay. The Single Judge dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.11934 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision:12.07.2011
Surinder Chauhan
...Petitioner
versus
Vijaya Bank, B.R.S. Nagar, Ludhiana through its Branch Manager and another. ....Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
Present: Mr.Gaurav Tangri, Advocate, for the petitioner.
K.Kannan, J. (Oral)
The petitioner is aggrieved against an action taken by the Bank under the SARFAESI Act taking up possession of a property which, according to the petitioner, is unjustified. The petitioner's grievance is that even when the money was ready to be paid to the Bank, the Bank would not receive the same but would obtain unlawful entry into possession of property and lock the premises. Any action pursuant to Section 13(4) of SARFAESI Act is appealable under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act and this point has been squarely covered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Indian Overseas Bank Versus Ashok Saw Mills-
2009 (8) SCC 366 . I decline the intervention as sought for by the petitioner and dismiss the writ petition.
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE
12.07.2011 sanjeev
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Indian Overseas Bank Versus Ashok Saw MillsReferred¶10
2009 (8) SCC 366 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Surinder Chauhan
Vijaya Bank, B.R.S. Nagar, Ludhiana through its Branch Manager
another
K Kannan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
