BANK OF BARODA THRU. CHIEF MANAGER AND POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR.RITESH KUMAR SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO AND 2 OTHERS
/11518/2025 · 2025-12-02
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 181521 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 181521 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11518 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J.
HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Shri Amit Chandra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.4. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner has prayed for the following substantial relief(s):
"i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby commanding the Respondent no. 2 & 3 to provide the police force immediately in terms of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 as well as Order, Dated-15.02.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barabanki in Misc. Case No. 311 of 2025; Bank of Baroda Vs. M/S Bharat Rubber Industries U/S 14 of aforesaid Act of 2002 (Annexure No. 1) and also ensure the peaceful actual possession of the Secured Asset i.e. i. Equitable Mortgage of factory land and building bearing Plot No. 78 measuring 7561.75 sq. ft. situated at Industrial Estate at Village-Para Khandoli Tehsil-Nawabganj, District-Barabanki, U.P. in name of respondent No. 4 immediately and without any further delay. ii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of commanding the opposite parties to ensure the peaceful actual possession of the aforesaid secured asset as per the provisions of the Section 14 of SARFAESI Act, Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Prashant Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Bank Of Baroda Thru. Chief Manager And Power Of Attorney Holder Mr.Ritesh Kumar Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)
2002."
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.4- borrower has submitted that a 15-day notice is required to be given before the Bank takes possession of the said property as per the order dated 24th July,
2025. The said order is also present in the writ petition and the same has been disclosed by the Bank. 4. In light of the above, we are of the view that the Station House Officer should be directed to act in accordance with law.
The Bank should issue a 15-day notice to the respondent No.4-borrower for taking possession of the said property, and thereafter, the Station House Officer is directed to constitute a team and take possession of the property in accordance with law. 5. We make it clear that this order shall not prevent respondent No.4 from seeking any further order from the Debt Recovery Tribunal in accordance with law. 6. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. December 2, 2025 Ashutosh WRIC No. 11518 of 2025 2 (Manjive Shukla,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench