NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1277 of 2024

1. Laxman S/o Prem Lal Aged About 45 Years R/o House No. 214, Gaura Chauk, Kahar Para, Village - Malkharouda, Tahsil - Malkharaouda, District Sakti (C.G.).

2. Ghasneen Bai W/o Bhuru Ram Aged About 44 Years R/o House No. -

214, Gaura Chouk, Kahar Para, Village - Malkharouda, Tahsil -

Malkharauda, District Sakti (C.G.).

---- Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Disrict Magistrate, District Sakti (C.G.).

2. Poonawala Housing Finance Limited Earlier Known As Magma Housing Finance Limited, A Company Registered Under The Provisions Of Companies Act, Having Registered OfÏce At 24, Park Street, Kolkata, 700016, Branch OfÏce At T.P. Nagar, Korba, District Korba, (C.G.), Through Authorised Signatory, Mr. Tushar Joshi, S/o Suresh Joshi.

---- Respondents (Cause Title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. R. K. Verma Advocate For Res./State : Mr. Vedang Shadangi, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

04.03.2024

1. By way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following relief(s):-

“(i) Allow this petition and quashed the order which is passed by District Magistrate Sakti (AnnexureP/1).

(ii) That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be please to direct the respondent No. 2, should be stopped for further action.

(iii) Please grant stay to the petitioner and stop the respondent from taking the above land.

(iv) Pass any other order the Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice.”

2. The facts of the present case are that the petitioner took a home loan of Rs.

8 lacs from respondent No. 2, Bank and a loan agreement was entered into between the parties on 27.04.2015. A land bearing survey No. 459/2 admeasuring 0.08 acers situated Patwari Halka No. 18 Mauja village Malkharoda Tahshil- Malkharoda Distirct- Shakti was mortgaged against loan amount. The petitioner could not repay the installments therefore, the account of the petitioner was declared Non-Performing Asset by the respondent bank on 01.05.2021. Thereafter, a notice under Section under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued to the petitioner on 08.11.2021 and 60 days’ time was granted to deposit the total outstanding loan amount of Rs. 8, 23776/-. The petitioner did not reply to the notice and thereafter, an application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 was moved by the respondent bank before the Collector District- Shakti. The Collector, Shakti vide its order dated 19.01.2024, allowed the application moved by the respondent bank and directed the concerned Tahshildar to take physical possession of mortgaged property. Hence, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 19.04.2019 passed by the Collector/district Magistrate, Shakti.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has passed only 8^th class and he could not understand the terms and conditions of the agreement, therefore, it would not be binding upon him. He would also submit that part of loan amount was paid by the petitioner but the same has not been taken into consideration. He would again submit that the account of the petitioner was declared Non-Performing Asset contrary to rules issued by the Reserve Bank of India. He would further submit that on account of Covid Pandemic the petitioner could not repay installments. The District Magistrate/Collector, Shakti has passed the order without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the documents placed on the record.

5. From perusal of the document it appears that the petitioner took a loan of Rs. 8 lacs and mortgaged his property. The petitioner and the respondent Bank entered into an agreement on 27.04.2015 but he could not repay the installments and the account of the petitioner was declared Non-Performing Asset by the respondent bank on 01.05.2021. Thereafter a notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was issued on 08.11.2021 but no