Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2026 DAILYLAW 9167 (RAJ)

VASTU HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CW/9920/2026 · 2026-06-29

Anand Sharma

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2026:RJ-JP:23686] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9920/2026 URN: CW / 22128U / 2026 Vastu Housing Finance Corporation Limited, Having One Of Its Branch Office At 1St Floor, Marudhar Plaza, F-300, Shyam Nagar, Opposite New Sanganer Road Pillar No. 102, Sodala, Jaipur, Rajasthan Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Ravi Pratap Singh ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Home, Government Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan 2. Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur (East), At Jaipur, Rajasthan 3. Station House Officer, Jamdoli, At Jamdoli, Rajasthan. 4. Mr. Deep Chand Saini S/o N/a, Address- P.no. 14, Narayan Vatika, Keshav Vidhyapith Choraha, Jaisingh Pura Khor Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302031 5. Mr. Dinesh Kumar Saini S/o N/a, Address- P.no. 14, Narayan Vatika, Keshav Vidhyapith Choraha, Jaisingh Pura Khor Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302031 6. Mrs. Lalita Saini W/o N/a, Address- P.no. 14, Narayan Vatika, Keshav Vidhyapith Choraha, Jaisingh Pura Khor Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302031 7. Mrs Manisha Saini W/o N/a, Address- P.no. 14, Narayan Vatika, Keshav Vidhyapith Choraha, Jaisingh Pura Khor Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302031 8. 9. Mr. Radhey Shyam Saini S/o N/a, Address- P.no. 14, Narayan Vatika, Keshav Vidhyapith Choraha, Jaisingh Pura Khor Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 302031 Mr. Manish Saini S/o N/A Aged about N/A years, Address- 6 Hanuman Nagar, Sumel Road, Agra Road, Purani Chungi, Looniyawas, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302031. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Neha Sharma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Devakriti Vashistha, AAAG for Mr. Bhuwnesh Sharma, AAG [2026:RJ-JP:23686] (2 of 3) [CW-9920/2026] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 29/06/2026 1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner contending therein that the petitioner is a finance company registered under the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'the Act of 2002'). The petitioner granted financial assistance to the respondent Nos.4 to 9, however, they failed to repay the loan, hence, the petitioner invoked Section 13 of the Act of 2002 which was followed by proceedings under Section 14 of the Act of 2002, wherein order dated 06.04.2026 was passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Jaipur Metropolitan-I for entitling the petitioner to take possession of the secured asset and directions were also given to the Police Commissioner to provide police assistance, in case need so arises. 2. Learned counsel submits that despite the specific order dated 06.04.2026, the respondent Nos.1 to 3 are not providing police assistance to the petitioner, hence, a prayer has been made to direct the respondent Nos.1 to 3 to provide police assistance for taking possession of secured asset. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record. 4. This Court finds that Section 14 of the Act of 2002 is a self contained Code for the purpose of taking possession and even in the cases, where despite directions given by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate, as the case may be, in case, necessary police help is not provided by the Authorities, [2026:RJ-JP:23686] (3 of 3) [CW-9920/2026] then under Section 14(2) of the Act of 2002, appropriate application can be moved by the aggrieved financial institution for seeking further directions for securing compliance of order earlier passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate as the case may be. 5. In the instant case, nothing has been placed on record by the petitioner to show that the petitioner has filed any application under Section 14(2) of the Act of 2002 for seeking appropriate directions for the purpose of compliance of order dated 06.04.2026. 6. Under these circumstances at this stage the writ petition is premature and is not maintainable, hence, is hereby dismissed. 7. It is, however, made clear that mere dismissal of this writ petition would not preclude the petitioner from filing an application under Section 14(2) of the Act of 2002 before concerned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate for seeking compliance of order dated 06.04.2026. 8. In view of above, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. 9. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J 65/Jatin