1 CGHC010226202026 2026:CGHC:35343 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3026 of 2026 1 - Rahul Agrawal S/o Omprakash Agrawal Aged About 30 Years All R/o Ward No. 5 Main Road Naila Thana And Tehsil Janjgir District Janjgir Champa C.G. 2 - Mrs, Monika Agrawal W/o Rahul Agrawal R/o Ward No. 5 Main Road Naila Thana And Tehsil Janjgir District Janjgir Champa C.G.(Co-Applicant) 3 - Om Prakash Agrawal S/o Dwarika Prasad Agrawal R/o Ward No. 5 Main Road Naila Thana And Tehsil Janjgir District Janjgir Champa C.G. (Co-Applicant) 4 - Madhu Agrawal W/o Om Prakash Agrawal R/o Ward No. 5 Main Road Naila Thana And Tehsil Janjgir District Janjgir Champa C.G. (Co-Applicant) 5 - Rahul Traders Through Its Proprietor Rahul Agrawal R/o Ward No. 5 Main Road Naila Thana And Tehsil Janjgir District Janjgir Champa C.G. (Co-Applicant) ... Petitioners Versus 1 - Cholamandalam Investment And Fince Co- Ltd Through Its Authorized Officer, Having Its Office At Chola Crat C 54-55, And Super B-4 Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate Gundy Chennai 600032. 2 - Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co-Ltd. Through- Its Authorized Office Having Its Office At 1st Floor Baradawar Road Above Kanchan Mahasale Janjgir Champa District Janjgir Champa C.G. ... Respondents (Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.) RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Date: 2026.08.12 16:04:46 +0530 2 For Petitioners : Mr. Akhtar Hussain, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Atul Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 11/08/2026 1. The petitioners have filed the instant petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the instant case. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and set aside the impugned notice dated 26.05.2026 (Annexure P/1), in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the DRT, Jabalpur is presently not functioning effectively and, therefore, in the emergent circumstances, the petitioners have no efficacious and immediate remedy before the Tribunal, warranting interference by this Hon’ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He next submits that the matter is already pending before the DRT, yet the respondents have issued notice for taking possession of the petitioners’ property with only one day’s notice, which is arbitrary, unreasonable and contrary to the principles of natural justice. The petitioners have already paid approximately half of the loan amount and has approached the respondents seeking reasonable time to pay the settlement amount and close the loan, thereby demonstrating his bona fides. Since the right to property is protected under Article 300-A of the Constitution and 3 the petitioners are under an imminent threat of dispossession without adequate opportunity, this Hon’ble Court may kindly protect the petitioners’ property and prevent any coercive action, particularly in view of the similar protection granted in Piyush Prakash Gupta v. Orix Leasing and Financial Services India Limited, W.P.C. No. 2022 of 2026. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioners have already approached the learned DRT, Jabalpur, which is the competent forum for adjudication of the dispute, and therefore, the petitioners have an efficacious statutory remedy available before the said Tribunal. It is further submitted that merely because the petitioners apprehend coercive action or seek protection of the property, the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ought not to be invoked when the matter is already pending before the competent Tribunal. As such, the writ petition is not maintainable and the petitioners as there is nothing to adjudicate in this petition. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having considered the rival submissions, this Court is of the view that the petitioners have already approached the learned DRT, Jabalpur, which is the competent forum to consider their grievance. Therefore, the petitioners are directed to pursue the concerned authority/learned DRT for appropriate relief in accordance with law. 4 5. With this observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of. 6. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju