1 2025:CGHC:54029 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5766 of 2025 AU Small Finance Bank Ltd Registered Office, 19 A, Dhuleshwar Garden Ajmer Road, Jaipur- 302001, Rajasthan Through- Authorized Signatory Sumit Maheshwari, Presently Working As Senior Manager, S/o Suresh Chandra Maheshwari Aged About- 42 Yrs, R/o 30 Chanchal Vihar Colony Ring Road No.01, Near Kashiram Nagar Raipur (C.G.) --- Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Chief Secretary Mantralaya, New Raipur Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chief Judicial Magistrate Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Tehsildar Raipur (C.G.) 5 - M/s Lavana Traders Through- Proprietor Uma Agrawal Office Address- 320a 03, Lal Ganga Mids Fafadih Road, District- Raipur (C.G.) --- Respondent ______________________________________________________________ For Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Soni, Advocate For State/respondents : Mr. Pranjal Shukla, P.L. S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order On Board 06/11/2025 1. Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :- “10.1 This Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue appropriate writ commanding respondent authorities for handing over the possession of secured BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: 2025.11.12 10:38:09 +0530 2 asset in favour of the present petition as adjudicated by the respondent No.2 vide order dated 26.07.2025 in Case No. MJC No. 860/2025 AU Small Finance Bank Vs. Lavanya Traders and Anr. Immediately and scrupulously. 10.2 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper for the just adjudication of the case and protecting constitutional rights of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that pursuant to the order dated 26.07.2025 of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur, respondent No.4 has issued a memo to Maljamadar for taking possession of secured assets and to hand it over to petitioner on 15.09.2025 and thereafter on 25.09.2025 and lastly on 24.10.2025, but till date Maljamadar has not taken any action to hand over the possession of secured assets as specified therein, therefore, a direction be issued to respondent No.4 to direct the Maljamadar to take possession of secured assets within the time framed. 3. Learned counsel for State submits that Tahsildar/respondent No.4 has already issued a memo for taking possession of secured assets, from it appears that respondent No.4 has already initiated proceedings for taking possession of secured assets pursuant to the order dated 26.07.2025 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Raipur. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. Grievance of petitioner is only against inaction on the part of the Tahsildar in not complying with the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate in an application under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, 'the SARFAESI Act'). 6. Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, is relevant, which is reproduced as under:- “14. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate to assist secured creditor in taking possession of secured asset.—(1) Where the possession of any secured assets 3 is required to be taken by the secured creditor or if any of the secured assets is required to be sold or transferred by the secured creditor under the provisions of this Act, the secured creditor may, for the purpose of taking possession or control of any such secured assets, request, in writing, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate within whose jurisdiction any such secured asset or other documents relating thereto may be situated or found, to take possession thereof, and the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or, as the case may be, the District Magistrate shall, on such request being made to him— (a) take possession of such asset and documents relating thereto; and (b) forward such asset and documents to the secured creditor [Provided that any application by the secured creditor shall be accompanied by an affidavit duly affirmed by the authorized officer of the secured creditor, declaring that- i. the aggregate amount of financial assistance granted and the total claim of the Bank as on the date of filing the application; ii. the borrower has created security interest over various properties and that the Bank or Financial Institution is holding a valid and subsisting security interest over such properties and the claim of the Bank or Financial Institution is within the limitation period; iii. the borrower has created security interest over various properties giving the details of properties referred to in sub-clause (ii) above; iv. the borrower has committed default in repayment of the financial assistance granted aggregating the specified amount; v. consequent upon such default in repayment of the financial assistance the account of the borrower has been classified as a nonperforming asset; vi. affirming that the period of sixty days notice as required by the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 13, demanding payment of the defaulted financial assistance has been served on the borrower; vii. the objection or representation in reply to the notice received from the borrower has been considered by the secured creditor and reasons for non-acceptance of such objection or representation had been communicated to the borrower; 4 viii. the borrower has not made any repayment of the financial assistance in spite of the above notice and the Authorised Officer is, therefore, entitled to take possession of the secured assets under the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 13 read with section 14 of the principal Act; ix. that the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder had been complied with: Provided further that on receipt of the affidavit from the Authorised Officer, the District Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, shall after satisfying the contents of the affidavit pass suitable orders for the purpose of taking possession of the secured assets within a period of thirty days from the date of application.] [Provided [also] that if no order is passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate within the said period of thirty days for reasons beyond his control, he may, after recording reasons in writing for the same, pass the order within such further period but not exceeding in aggregate sixty days.] Provided also that the requirement of filing affidavit stated in the first proviso shall not apply to proceeding pending before any District Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, on the date of commencement of this Act.] [(1A) The District Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate may authorise any officer subordinate to him,- (i) to take possession of such assets and documents relating thereto; and (ii) to forward such assets and documents to the secured creditor.] (2) For the purpose of securing compliance with the provisions of sub-section (1), the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate of the District Magistrate may take or cause to be taken such steps and use, or cause to be used, such force, as may, in his opinion, be necessary. (3) No act of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate [any officer authorised by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate] done in pursuance of this section shall be called in question in any court or before any authority.” 7. Section 14 (2) of the SARFAESI Act envisages that the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate of the District Magistrate may take or cause to be taken such steps and use, or cause to be used, such force, as may, in his opinion, be necessary. 5 8. Considering the documents as enclosed along with writ petition it appears that the Chief Judicial Magistrate in its order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act has directed the Tahsildar to take possession of the secured assets and may also seek assistance of necessary police force for taking possession. Tahsildar pursuant to the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate has issued memo to Maljamadar thrice i.e. on 19.09.2025, 29.09.2025 and 24.10.2025, however, it appears that Tahsildar has not taken steps to verify as to why the memo of possession could not be acted upon within time frame as mentioned therein. Tahsildar is only required to execute the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. He is required to execute order in accordance with the words and spirit of provisions U/s.14 of the SARFAESI Act. 9. In the aforementioned facts of the case respondent No.4 is directed to take necessary measures and steps for complying the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act and to take possession of secured assets as mentioned in the order of Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 26.07.2025 within further period of two months from the date of receipt of this order. 10. With aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram