Shree Madhav Edible vs PNB Writ Dismissed

Authority: High Court at Calcutta (Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction)

Order Date: Not specified

Case Overview

• Petitioners: M/s. Shree Madhav Edible Products Ltd. & Ors.
• Respondents: Punjab National Bank & Ors.
• Petition challenges notice dated 5 Aug 2026 issued under Rule 8(6) of Security Interest Enforcement Rules, 2002, claiming Rs 1,81,69,562.
• Petitioners claim one‑time settlement was fully executed; bank alleges default on settlement payments.
• Bank’s senior manager sent email on 22 May 2026 proposing condonation of delay; petitioners argue secured debt exists.
• Bank relies on Supreme Court judgment (G. Vikram Kumar v. State Bank of Hyderabad, 2023) to argue writ jurisdiction is inappropriate.
• Court considered whether secured debt exists and whether SARFAESI provisions can be invoked, noting such questions lie with Debt Recovery Tribunal.

Final Outcome

• Court held the matter is within the jurisdiction of the Debt Recovery Tribunal, not the writ jurisdiction under Article 226, and therefore dismissed the writ petition.
• No costs awarded; parties directed to approach the DRT urgently before the e‑auction scheduled for 2 Sept 2026.
• Court clarified it has not examined merits and DRT proceedings should not be influenced by its observations.

Topics: SARFAESI, Debt Recovery Tribunal