1 CGHC010260272026 2026:CGHC:29762 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3643 of 2026 1 - Santosh Tanwani S/o Shri Jairam Das Tanwani Aged About 63 Years R/o 707/708, Khushi Vihar, Avanti Vihar, Near White House, Telibandha, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492006 2 - Nanak Ram Tanwani S/o Shri Jairam Das Tanwani Aged About 58 Years R/o 707/708, Khushi Vihar, Avanti Vihar, Near White House, Telibandha, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492006 3 - Smt. Tara Devi Tanwani W/o Shri Aial Das Tanwani Aged About 58 Years R/o 707/708, Khushi Vihar, Avanti Vihar, Near White House, Telibandha, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492006 4 - Deepak Tanwani S/o Shri Santosh Tanwani Aged About 28 Years R/o 707/708, Khushi Vihar, Avanti Vihar, Near White House, Telibandha, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492006 ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act (Cin U67190mh2008plc187552), Having Its Registered Office At 11th Floor, Tower A, Peninsula Business Park, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400013, And Its Branch Office At First Floor, Pujari Chambers, N.H. 43, Machhpedi Naka, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492001, Through Its Branch/ Authorised Officer ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 2 - The Authorised Officer Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited, Branch Office- First Floor, Pujari Chambers, N.H. 43, Machhpedi Naka, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh- 492001 3 - The Tahsildar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector/ District Magistrate, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pankaj Singh, Advocate For State : Mr. Anway Tiwari, Panel Lawyer For Caveator(s) : Mr. Sachidanand Yadav, Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 14.07.2026 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following relief(s):- “10.1. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, including a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 12.05.2026 and memo dated 11.06.2026 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and Respondent No.3 respectively and/or 10.2. issue an appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the Respondents, their officers, servants and agents, from 3 taking physical possession of, or in any manner dispossessing the Petitioners from, the mortgaged property described hereinabove, in purported enforcement of the impugned order; and/or 10.3. issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to duly consider and dispose of the representation/objection dated 05.02.2026 in accordance with law; and/or 10.4. pass any other or further order(s) in favour of the Petitioners as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with costs.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice/memo dated 11.06.2026 has been issued for taking physical possession of the house in dispute. It is further submitted that, at the relevant point of time, the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Jabalpur was not functioning, and, therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition. Learned counsel further submits that the additional charge of the DRT, Jabalpur has now been entrusted to DRT, Ahmedabad. Accordingly, he seeks liberty for the petitioner to approach the DRT-II, Ahmedabad by availing the statutory remedy. It is also submitted that since the notice contemplates taking physical possession of the secured asset on 22.07.2026, the petitioner 4 may be granted reasonable time to approach the DRT-II, Ahmedabad and obtain appropriate interim relief. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent–Bank submits that the notice dated 11.06.2026 was issued more than a month ago, yet the petitioner did not avail the appropriate remedy within a reasonable time and has approached this Court belatedly. It is, therefore, submitted that no indulgence is warranted. 4. Learned State counsel submits that the notice dated 11.06.2026 has been issued in pursuance of the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur, and the authorities are merely acting in execution thereof. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Jabalpur is presently not functioning and its charge has been entrusted to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ahmedabad, the learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to approach the DRT, Ahmedabad within a period of 30 days by filing an appropriate application, clearly indicating the urgency of the matter, whereupon the Tribunal shall consider the same in accordance with law. 7. Till then the respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner in pursuance of the order dated 11.07.2026. 5 8. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s). Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Saxena