High CourtsDivision Bench(2025) 10 P&H CK 1419

Ranbir Singh vs State Bank Of India And Others

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 15 October 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sheel Nagu, CJ · Sanjiv Berry, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 1434 Of 2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 361 words

Sheel Nagu, CJ

1.

Prayer made in this petition is to the following effect: -

(I) Issue a writ, order or direction especially in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to refund the amount of Rs. 11,00,000/- handed over by the petitioner to the counsel for the bank to purchase the disputed shop before this Hon’ble High Court by way of Demand Draft No. 019790 dated 12.05.2012, Demand Draft No. 000012 dated 15.05.2012 and Demand Draft No. 000013 dated 15.05.2012 during the hearing of CWP No. 8284 of 2012 on 25.07.2012 along with 18% interest from the date of deposit till the realization of the same, in the interest of justice;

(ii) Issuance a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents to decide the Legal Notice dated 24.07.2024 (Annexure P-9) submitted by the petitioner within some specified time, in the interest of justice;

(iii) Issue any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;

(iv) Dispense with filing of certified copies of the Annexures and the petitioner may kindly be permitted to place on record photo copies of the same;

(v) Dispense with issuance of advance notices to the respondents as per requirement of the Hon’ble High Court rules and Orders;

(vi) The writ petition may kindly be allowed with costs.

2.

Petitioner is raising dispute with regard to auction which was held on 19.03.2012 without actively participating in the said auction.

3.

Various submissions have been made which relate more to the realm of disputed questions of fact.

4.

We would not like to comment upon the admissibility or entertainability of this petition. In view of the fact that we are relegating the petitioner that in case he is aggrieved by any order of Debt Recovery Tribunal, he can approach the appellate forum u/s 18 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

4.

In view of above, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal after establishing that he is one of the aggrieved persons.

5.

Petition stands disposed of.