GRIHUM HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BARNALA

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(P&H) 5618

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SHEEL NAGU, CJ, SANJIV BERRY, J
GRIHUM HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, BARNALA – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vipul Dharmani
For the Respondents: Vipin Pal Yadav

Table of Content
1. importance of executing orders under the sarfaesi act. (Para 1 , 2)
2. compliance with judicial guidelines is mandatory. (Para 4 , 7)
3. direction for prompt action on asset recovery. (Para 5 , 6)
4. conclusion on the petition's status. (Para 8)

SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL)

1. The present writ petition has been filed by petitioner Grihum Housing Finance Limited aggrieved by non-execution of the order dated 01.09.2025 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Barnala under the provisions of Section 14 Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act for brevity).

2. It is rather surprising that Additional District Magistrate, Barnala or the concerned Tehsildar/Naib Tehsildar, (Respondent No. 2) have failed to discharge their statutory duty of assisting and handing over physical possession of the secured asset to the petitioner Bank.

2.1 Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) are a huge burden on the public exchequer, banking and financial system, and, thus, prompt enforcement of recovery mechanism under the SARFAESI Act is paramount for liquidity in the system.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Vipi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document