IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ACCIL Hospitality Private Limited ....Petitioner Versus IFCI Limited and others ...Respondents Reserved on : 20.11.2025 Pronounced on : 27.02.2026 Uploaded on : 27.02.2026 Whether only operative part of the judgment is pronounced or the full judgment is pronouned: operative part/full judgment CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY *****

Present: Mr. Anand Chhibbar, Senior Advocate (Arguing Counsel)

with Mr. Nitin Kaushal, Advocate, Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Tanuj Sud, Advocate, Ms. Swati Vashisth, Advocate, Ms. Ateevraj Sandhu, Advocate, and Mr. Inderjeet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Puneet Bali, Senior Advocate (Arguing Counsel), with Mr. Gagandeep Singh, Advocate, Ms. Ayushi Garg, Advocate, and Mr. Mahender Joshi, Advocate, for respondent No.1-IFCI Limited.

Mr. Dheeraj Jain, Senior Advocate (Arguing Counsel), with Mr. Amit Sharma, Senior Panel Counsel, for respondent No.2-UOI.

Mr. Indresh Goel, Advocate, for respondent No.3-RBI.

*****

SHEEL NAGU, C.J.

1. The writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is invoked seeking quashing of Notice for Assignment of Debt, dated 28.12.2022, issued by respondent No.1-IFCI Limited and for a writ of Mandamus to respondent No.2-UOI to clarify the effect of assignment u/s 5(2) ofSecuritization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short ‘SARFAESI Act’).

2. To understand the chequered history of this case, it would be appropriate to delineate the factual matrix in tabular form chronologically, as follows: -

Date Particulars

2010 to 2016 Credit Facilities were sanctioned to the Principal Borrower (ACCIL) by a consortium of 15 lenders (including State Bank of India) and IFCI Limited (Respondent No.1) of approximately Rs.4000 Crores.

25.07.2014 IFCI (Respondent No.1) issued Sanction Letter extending Corporate Loan to Principal Borrower (ACCIL) of Rs.150 Crores.

22.08.2014 Corporate Loan Agreement was executed between Principal Lender and ACCIL (Asian Colour Coated Ispat Limited), which is secured by the following:

(i) Mortgage of Hotel Property measuring 2275 Sq.

3. From the aforesaid factual matrix, it is obvious that the petitioner is laboring under the misconception that the liability arising out of Corporate Loan and the liability arising out of Personal Guarantee executed by promoters to secure the corporate loan is one and the same. There is a subtle and yet palpable difference between these two concepts, which is evident from the order of the NCLT dated 26.10.2020 approving the Resolution Plan + Addendum.

4. The clear findings of the NCLT have not only been approved by the NCLAT on 01.03.2024, but also by dismissal of the Civil Appeal filed u/s 62 of IBC, by the Apex Court on 19.04.2024.

5. The Principal borrower/ACCIL availed term loan and working capital facilities from various lenders, which led to execution of common loan agreement. Similarly, a Corporate Loan Agreement dated 22.08.2014 was executed between ACCIL and respondent No.1-IFCI Limited. This agreement was secured by personal guarantee deed issued by the ACCIL Hospitality Private Limited (petitioner herein) on 22.08.2014, creating a mortgage by way of deposit of title deed in respect of property measuring 2275 Sq. meters i.e. plot No.1, Sector 21-C, Faridabad, Haryana. There were defaults in repayment by the principal borrower/ACCIL, which led to CIRP proceedings culminating in the approval of resolution plan dated 26.10.2020. This corporate plan, inter alia, provided that any mortgage/hypothecation provided by the petitioner/ACCIL Hospitality Private Limited and the corporate guarantee provided by petitioner/ACCIL Hospitality Private Limited shall form part of “excluded rights.” These “excluded rights” gave liberty to the lenders to enforce the mortgage and guarantee to recover the outstanding dues from third party security provider i.e. Pe