1 2025:CGHC:30864 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3379 of 2025 1 - Anshubala Gupta W/o Balkishore Gupta Aged About 57 Years R/o Kansabel, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh 2 - Nitesh Kumar Gupta S/o Balkishore Gupta Aged About 35 Years R/o Kansabel, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Bank Of India Through Manager, Branch Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh 2 - District Magistrate Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. P. Chetan Kumar, Advocate assisted by Mr. K.P. Sahu, Advocate For State : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, Panel lawyer For Respondent no. 1 : Mr. P. R. Patankar, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 07.07.2025 1. By way of this petition the petitioner is seeking for following relief:- 2 “a. That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the revenue proceedings pending before Collector, Jashpur. b. That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the revenue proceedings bearing no. B-121/2024-25 under Section 41 of SARFAESI Act, 2002, under which the realization of loan amount pending before the Collector, Jashpur. c. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deem fit and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order is against the petitioner of seizing the property and auctioning it in order to recover the loan amount is totally arbitrary and illegal action taken by the respondent bank authorities. He submits that the petitioners have also got relief in view of paying of the installment with regard to the loan amount after the break in payment of installment that looking to their financial condition of family and health condition of mother, the amount of Rs. 13,000/- has been fixed to pay regularly, which was duly complied by petitioners. He also contended that the State Bank has hold his salary account, hence he is facing great hardship. Petitioner was making the repayment of loan but due to some health reasons he was unable to repay the loan. 3 3. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondents opposes the relief sought by the learned counsel for the petitioners stating that the petition is not maintainable as the proceedings have been initiated. Learned counsel for Respondent no. 1 placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd wherein in para 8 it has been held as under:- 21. Applying the law laid down by this Court in the case of Mathew K.C. (supra) to the facts on hand, we are of the opinion that filing of the writ petitions by the borrowers before the High Court under Article 26 of the Constitution of India is an abuse of process of the Court. The writ petitions have been filed against the proposed action to be taken under Section 13(4), in that case also, in view of the statutory, efficacious remedy available by way of appeal under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, the High court ought not to have entertained the writ petitions. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties, and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Considering the aspects of the case, it has been observed that the petitioners received the notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 vide order dated 14.07.2023. Be that it may be, it is clear that the petitioners have not paid the entire loan amount taken from the State Bank of India, Jashpur/respondent no. 1 and due to which the respondent no. 1/State Bank of India has initiated a proceedings against the petitioners under Section 41 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, under 4 which the realization of loan amount has to be recovered from the petitioners. Therefore, the present petition is not maintainable. It deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as not maintainable. 7. However, the petitioners are at liberty to file other objections raised in this writ petition before the Collector, Jashpur. 8. Certified copies as per rules. sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) ALFIZA Judge