Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Allahabad HC Ruling Upholding DRT Registrar's Power to Issue Notice Under SARFAESI
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a special leave petition challenging an Allahabad High Court ruling that upheld the authority of the Registrar of the Debts Recovery Tribunal to issue notice in a securitisation application under the SARFAESI Act.
A Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma declined to interfere with the High Court's decision, observing, “We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of the High Court; hence, the special leave petition is dismissed.”
The dispute arose from a notice dated November 11, 2025 issued by the Registrar of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow, directing the opposite parties to appear and show cause why the securitisation application filed under the SARFAESI Act should not be allowed.
The petitioner had approached the Allahabad High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution, arguing that the Registrar had no jurisdiction to issue such a notice. It was contended that the power to admit, hear and decide securitisation applications rests exclusively with the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal and not with its Registrar.
On January 19, 2026, Justice Subhash Vidyarthi rejected the challenge. The High Court examined the Debts Recovery Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1993 and held that the Registrar is empowered to receive applications, scrutinise them, fix dates of hearing subject to the directions of the Presiding Officer, and issue notices.
The court also noted that the matter had already been placed before the Presiding Officer, making the grievance largely academic. It held that no grave injustice or jurisdictional error warranting interference under Article 227 was made out and dismissed the petition at the admission stage.
For Petitioners: Advocates Suryansh Kumar Arora, Vivek Kumar, Abhinav Kumar Garg, Noel Victor, Elesh Singh, Aakash Aggarwal, Karan Verma, AOR