Writ petitions under Article 226 not maintainable against SARFAESI proceedings; must approach DRT under Section 17.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.

1. The appellant filed W.P.(C)No.10141 of 2026, invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P4 notice dated 03.03.2026 issued by the Advocate Commissioner appointed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kottayam in M.C.No.18 of 2026, in a proceeding initiated by HDFC Bank Ltd. and its Authorised Officer, invoking the provisions under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act), seeking assistance of the Court to take possession of the secured asset; and a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent Authorised Officer of HDFC Bank to grant sufficient and reasonable time to the petitioner to clear off the legally outstanding overdue amount, and till such time direct the respondent to keep in abeyance all further proceedings against the secured asset having an extent of 11.30 Ares comprising of 6.75 Ares in Re.Sy.No.139/20, 3.55 Ares in Re.Sy.No.139/21 and 1 Ares in Re.Sy.No.139/66 of Re.Sy.Block No.11 of Kanjirappally Village.

2. The proceedings initiated by the bank against the secured asset are in respect of two term loans and one non-residential premise refinance availed by the appellant-petitioner for Rs.3.85 crores (Rupees 3 crores + 60 lakhs + 25 lakhs) from HDFC Bank Ltd. On account of the default committed by the petitioner, the accounts were classified as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) and the bank initiated coercive steps under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act.

3. The appellant-petitioner had earlier approached this Court in W.P.(C)No.27809 of 2024, challenging the proceedings initiated by the bank under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act. That writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P1 judgment dated 30.08.2024, whereby he was granted time to pay overdue amount in 14 monthly installments, along with regular monthly installments. Paragraph 2 of that judgment reads thus:

“2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition as follows;

i. The petitioner shall pay a lump sum amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten lakhs only) on or before 01.10.2024.

ii. After making a payment of Rs.10,00,000/- as directed above, the petitioner shall pay the remaining overdue in 14 monthly equal instalments along with regular installments.

iii. The first installment is to be paid on or before 07.11.2024, and the remaining 13 installments on or before the 7^th day of each succeeding month, along with regular installments.

iv. After making payment of the entire overdue amount along with regular installments, the petitioner shall continue to pay the regular installments till the entire loan liabaility is discharged.

v. In case of failure to make payment of the lump sum amount of ten lakhs or any installments as directed above, the respondent bank shall be free to take possession of the secured assets. The Bank shall proceed against the petitioner in accordance with the law to realize its dues.

vii. Till such time, all coercive proceedings against the secured assets shall be deferred.”

4. Though the loan accounts were regularised, the accounts were again classified as NPA, on account of the default committed by the appellant-petitioner. Thereafter, a fresh notice dated 19.08.2025 under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued, which was followed by a possession notice. Seeking assistance of the Court to take physical possession of the secured asset, the bank moved an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kottayam in M.C.No.18 of 2026, invokin