Digitally signed by SHAYNA NAFR KADRI

(Cause Title is taken from CIS System)

Order on Board

1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:

“10.1 Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding Respondent No. 2i.e. Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Jagdalpur, District Bastar to execute the order passed by the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bastar at Jagdalpur under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, and hand over the physical possession of the secured asset to the petitioner within prescribed by law. a stipulated time frame as

10.2 Issue any other appropriate writ, order, or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case.

10.3 Award the cost of the writ petition to the petitioner.

2. Facts of the case, as projected in the petition, are that a loan amounting to Rs. 32,25,000/- was sanctioned in favour of Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 on 27.03.2014. In consideration thereof, the borrowers created a mortgage over an immovable property in favour of the petitioner, being Flat No. 20, 5th Floor, Block C, situated at Patwari Halka No. 90/1 & 90/4, Jagdalpur Dehat, Moti Talabpara Ramaiya Ward, Jagdalpur, Chhattisgarh, admeasuring 882 sq. ft., thereby securing the loan amount. It is further stated that Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 failed to adhere to the repayment schedule as agreed under the loan agreement, resulting in default. Consequently, the petitioner classified the loan account as a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on 09.12.2023 in accordance with applicable guidelines. Thereafter, a demand notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 was issued on 10.01.2025, calling upon the borrowers to discharge their outstanding liability amounting to Rs. 28,54,666.82/- (as calculated up to 09.01.2025) along with further interest and charges. However, despite service of the said notice, the borrowers failed to repay the dues within the stipulated period of 60 days. In these circumstances, the petitioner filed an application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bastar at Jagdalpur, seeking assistance for taking physical possession of the secured asset. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, vide order dated 02.01.2026, allowed the application and directed Respondent No. 2, i.e., the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Jagdalpur, to visit the site and take peaceful physical possession of the mortgaged property. The order further authorized breaking open the locks, if necessary, preparation of inventory, and taking police assistance to ensure compliance. Despite the clear mandate of the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, the concerned authority has failed to take any steps for execution of the said order and has remained inactive. Such continued inaction has deprived the petitioner of its lawful right to recover its dues by taking possession of the secured asset and has frustrated the very purpose of initiating proceedings under the SARFAESI Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the inaction on the part of Respondent No. 2 in not executing the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the statutory mandate. It is contended that the SARFAESI Act has been enacted with the objective of enabling banks and financial institutions to recover their dues expeditiously without undue delay, and any failure on the part of the authorities to assist in taking possession of secured assets defeats the legislative intent. It is further submitted that once an order under Section 14 has been passed, the role of the concerned authority is purely ministerial in nature, and they are duty-bound to ensure that possession of the secured asset is handed over to the secured creditor without any delay. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kotak Mahindra Bank vs.