Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ishan Jaiswal vs Vastu Housing Finance Cor. Ltd. on 5 May, 2026
Author: Anand Pathak
Bench: Anand Pathak
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:35121
1 WP-15561-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
ON THE 5 th OF MAY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 15561 of 2026
ISHAN JAISWAL
Versus
VASTU HOUSING FINANCE COR. LTD. AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Surdeep Khampariya - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Vinay Tripathi - Advocate for respondent No.1.
ORDER
Per: Justice Anand Pathak With consent, heard finally.
Present writ petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:
"I. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the concern Respondents not to take any coercive action against the mortgage property of petitioner till the final conclusion of SA No.98/2026.
Il. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 17.01.2026 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Betul in MJCR No. 783/2025 under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, being illegal, arbitrary.
III. Issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit."Signature Not Verified Signed by: PARMESHWAR GOPE Signing time: 06-05-2026 17:54:57
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:35121 2 WP-15561-2026
2. Petitioner is the borrower and respondent is a creditor. Petitioners borrowed Rs.63,93,725/- as mortgaged loan from respondent Bank. However, due to financial crunch, he could not repay the loan amount, therefore, proceedings under Sections 13/14 of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short "the Act, 2002") ensued.
3. Counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that an application under Section 17 of the Act, 2002 is being preferred before DRT, Jabalpur, after proceeding under Section 14 of the Act, 2002 is culminated. However, DRT, Jabalpur being not functional, it rendered the petitioners in a vulnerable position. Apparently they are remediless. Counsel for the petitioners further informs this Court that the petitioners are ready to deposit Rs.18,23,944/- as an interim arrangement to show their bonafides and meanwhile, their prayer for status quo be considered till DRT, Jabalpur, becomes functional. Thereafter, they may press the application under Section 17 of the Act, 2002 before the said forum. They are ready to settle down the N.P.A account, if bank is ready to accommodate them.
4. Counsel for the respondent fairly submits that if the petitioner come out with a viable and workable settlement/proposal, then bank will certainly look into it. It is further submitted that since the petitioner is ready to deposit the pay the defaulted amount, therefore, suitable condition may be imposed.
5. Considering the rival submissions and peculiar fact situation, this petition stands disposed of with following directions:-
Signature Not Verified Signed by: PARMESHWAR GOPE Signing time: 06-05-2026 17:54:57NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:35121 3 WP-15561-2026
(i) Without prejudice to any of the rights of the parties, the petitioner is directed to deposit Rs. 30 lacs with the respondent/bank within a period of 30 days from today subject to further orders that may be passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur in future.
(ii) The Presiding Officer of DRT is directed to take-up the S.A.98/2026 as soon as it becomes functional for consideration of prayer for interim relief and take a decision in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within one month from date of assumption of charge as Presiding Officer. The respondents shall not put the property to auction till the application for interim relief is decided by the Presiding Officer of DRT.
(iii) Till the prayer for interim relief in the said S.A. is decided by the DRT, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner subject to compliance of direction No.(i) as above.
(iv) The petitioner is directed to communicate this order to the Registrar, DRT, Jabalpur within seven working days from today.
(v) If there is excessive delay at any stage of the proceedings including in the appointment of Presiding Officer of DRT, Jabalpur or any other DRTs given Additional Charge, parties are free to approach this Court.
(vi) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
(vii) The auction purchaser, if any, as well as respondent/Bank shall follow the procedure as per Rule 9(1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement Rules), 2002 under the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
6. With aforesaid expectation of early hearing of application filed by Signature Not Verified Signed by: PARMESHWAR GOPE Signing time: 06-05-2026 17:54:57 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:35121 4 WP-15561-2026 the petitioner under Section 17 of the Act, 2002 before DRT, Jabalpur, petition stands disposed of.
(ANAND PATHAK) (B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
PG
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: PARMESHWAR
GOPE
Signing time: 06-05-2026
17:54:57