Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Durga Khairwar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 18 April, 2026
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:30225
1 WP-5325-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL
ON THE 18th OF APRIL, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 5325 of 2026
SMT. DURGA KHAIRWAR AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Devendra Kumar Dixit - Senior Advocate with Shri Kishori Lal
Pandey - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Abhijeet Awasthi - Deputy Advocate General for the respondent
No.1/State.
None present for the respondent No.4 despite the service.
ORDER
Per se Vivek Rusia J.
In the present case, the petitioners have applied for a loan from Respondent No.4 to the extent of Rs.25,00,000/- (Twenty Five Lakhs) in the year 2023, and further Rs. 35,00,000/- (Thirty Five Lakhs) during the year 2023, and in this way they totally borrowed Rs. 65,00,000/- (Sixty Five Lakhs). That, against the loan transaction, the petitioners have agreed to mortgage their house situated at Survey No.294/23 measuring 2150 sq. ft. situated at Ward No.13, Village Baihar, Tehsil- Baihar, District- Balaghat (M.P.). The duration of paying back the loan to the Respondent No.4 was 11 Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHIVANI TIWARI Signing time: 4/21/2026 12:00:25 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:30225 2 WP-5325-2026 years, but the petitioners became defaulters in repayment of EMIs. Hence, the Respondent No.4 has initiated proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (in short "SARFAESI Act" ). As per the order dated 29.09.2025 passed in MJCR351/2025 by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balaghat (M.P.), there is a threat of dispossession of the petitioners and thereafter an auction sale. Hence, they are before this High Court.
2. None present for the Respondent No.4, despite service of notice. Shri Abhijeet Awasthi, Deputy Advocate General, appearing on behalf of respondents on advance notice, submits that a similar situation came up before this Court in the year 2021, also, when there was no Presiding Officer and various writ petitions were filed before this Court. In one of the writ petitions, W.P. No.25138/2021 (M/s Divyadeep Sugar and Industries Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. India Bank and Others), this Court vide order dated 23.11.2021 has issued certain directions to be followed by the borrower as well as by the Bank/Financial Institutions.
3. In our opinion, at present, the petitioners are in default of payment of regular EMIs, and the period for repayment of the entire loan amount has not ended yet. In case of default in payment of 23 EMI. The borrowers cannot be expected to deposit the entire loan amount to the bank in one go, much before the completion of the total loan period. Had the petitioners have money for the purpose of which they took loan or financial assistance, they would not have taken the same from the bank public financial institutions, there is a period available to the petitioners for payment of loan, we deem it fit to protect the interests of borrowers like petitioners till the Debt Recovery Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHIVANI TIWARI Signing time: 4/21/2026 12:00:25 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:30225 3 WP-5325-2026 Tribunal Jabalpur starts functioning after the appointment of the Presiding Officer. We hereby dispose of the present writ petition with the following directions:-
(i) The petitioners shall file a Securitisation Appeal before the DRT, along with an application for interim relief within 15 days from today if already not filed yet.
(ii) The DRT is directed to take up the pending S.A. as soon as it becomes functional for consideration of interim relief and take a decision in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.
(iii) Without prejudice to any of the rights of the parties, the petitioners are directed to deposit 20% of the amount due as on date 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.
(iv) After depositing the said amount, the respondent bank/financial institution shall reschedule the EMI, which shall be paid by the petitioner regularly during pendency of S.A. or subject to any order passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal.
(v) Subject to the deposit of the 20% amount or till the prayer for interim relief in the said S.A. is decided by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, whichever is later, no coercive action be taken against the petitioners.
(vi) The petitioners are directed to communicate this order to the Registrar, DRT, Jabalpur, within seven working days from today.
(vii) If there is excessive delay at any stage of the proceedings, including in the appointment of the Presiding Officer of DRT, Jabalpur or no additional charge is given to any other Debt Recovery Tribunal, parties shall Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHIVANI TIWARI Signing time: 4/21/2026 12:00:25 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:30225
4 WP-5325-2026 be free to approach this Court.
(viii) This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
4. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (PRADEEP MITTAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
Shivani
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHIVANI TIWARI
Signing time: 4/21/2026
12:00:25 PM