IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.16071 of 2011 Date of Decision.30.08.2011 Sadhu Singh s/o Sh. Isher Singh r/o House No.130, Street No.7, Ram Nagar, Near SST Nagar, Patiala .....Petitioner Versus State Bank of Patiala having its Head Office of Patiala through its Chairman and another .....Respondents Present: Mr. Vivek Suri, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. The writ petition is against the recovery action taken under the SARFAESI Act. The contention of the petitioner is that he has had some personal difficulties and therefore, he could not repay the amounts. Any recovery by enforcement of security brought through an enactment, which is held to be a valid law, cannot be scuttled by a process of Article 226 of the Constitution interference. If the petitioner has any grievance, it will be directed appropriately in a Forum, which is created under the Act by means of an appeal before the DRT and not by means of a writ petition before this Court. 2. The remedy sought before this Court is in appropriate and it is dismissed as such. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE August 30, 2011 Pankaj*