2026:UHC:3380 SL. No. Dat e Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPMS No.1257 of 2026 Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. S.K. Chandel, learned Counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Yogesh Kumar Pande, learned Dy.A.G. with Mr. B.S. Koranga, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 12.08.2025 passed by respondent no.2 whereby respondent no.2 has passed the order under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act), directing the erstwhile owners of the house to deliver possession of residential house to respondent no.3; and a further direction has been sought to direct respondent no.3 not to proceed further pursuant to order dated 12.08.2025 passed by respondent no.2. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner purchased this residential house by way of a registered sale deed dated 27.04.2023 from Ankit Chauhan who purchased it from its earlier owner namely one Chandrapal Singh. Petitioner purchased this property after borrowing a loan from respondent no.4-Ummeed Housing Finance Ltd. and mortgaged the residential house in favour of respondent no.4. 5. It is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is regularly paying installments to respondent no.4 and he is not in 2026:UHC:3380 arrears, at all, so far as the loan borrowed by petitioner is concerned. But, in between, proceedings for recovery of loan advanced to Chandrapal Singh were initiated by respondent no.3 and the orders under Sections 13 and 14 of the Act were got passed in favour of respondent no.3. On enquiry, it was found that Chandrapal Singh, before selling the aforesaid residential house to petitioner, had sold the same to one Ankit Chauhan, from whom the petitioner had purchased the residential house through a registered sale deed dated 27.04.2023 by borrowing a loan from respondent no.3 and mortgaged the residential house in the name of respondent no.3. 6. It is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that petitioner, before purchase of that house had acquired information regarding any dues, lien and liability and got Non-Encumbrance Certificate from the concerned authorities, and further there was no mention in the Khatauni regarding mortgage of house in the name of respondent no.3, therefore the petitioner purchased the land considering it to be neat and clean without having any kind of lien or encumbrance over the said residential house. But now, with the initiation of recovery proceedings, it came to the notice of petitioner that the said residential house was mortgaged by erstwhile owner Chandrapal Singh in favour of respondent no.3 before its sale to Ankit Chauhan. 2026:UHC:3380 7. In the aforesaid background, impugned order has been passed for delivering the possession of said residential house to respondent no.3 under Section 14 of the Act. 8. Since the writ petition involves various disputed questions of fact, therefore, this Court does not find it a fit case to interfere with. 9. However, this writ petition is disposed of, in the facts and circumstances of the case, by permitting the petitioner to move an application before the concerned Debt Recovery Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act within a period of 15 days from today, on or before 20.05.2026. 10. Respondent no.3 shall not take possession of the residential house from the petitioner for a period of 15 days. 11. If the petitioner fails to file any such application, the law will take its own course. 12. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of. 13. Let a copy of this order be issued to the parties, today itself, as per Rules. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 05.05.2026 R.Dang 2026:UHC:3380