A writ petition against a Non-Banking Financial Company is not maintainable as it does not perform a public function, referring to precedents set by the Supreme Court.

JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.

The respondents in W.P.(C)No.44529 of 2025 have filed this writ appeal, invoking the provisions under Section 5 (i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, challenging the judgment dated 15.01.2026 of the learned Single Judge in that writ petition, which was one filed by the respondents herein-petitioners, invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents, namely, Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd., which is a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC), and its Authorised Officer to regularise the loan availed by the 1^st petitioner against Property Account No.HE1OCI00000036216 and the business loan availed by the 2^nd petitioner with Loan Account No.BLTLCOCH000005027799, from the Cochin Branch of the said NBFC, and to permit the petitioners to pay the overdue amount in the said loan accounts, in installments, as may be granted by this Court; and a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to proceed against the mortgaged property under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act).

2. Ext.P1 notice dated 06.08.2025 issued by the 2^nd respondent Authorised Officer of the 1^st respondent NBFC is in respect of the loan availed by the 1^st petitioner company against Property Account No.HE1OCI00000036216, for an amount of Rs.1,69,00,000/-, in which the overdue as on 31.07.2025 was Rs.4,75,488/- excluding late payment charges and other charges. In Ext.P2 notice dated 22.05.2024, which is in respect of the business loan availed by the 2^nd petitioner with Loan Account No.BLTLCOCH000005027799, for an amount of Rs.20,00,000/-, the overdue as on 22.05.2024 was Rs.51,882/-. The accounts were classified as a non-performing asset (NPA) on 06.08.2025 and the 2^nd respondent Authorised Officer issued Ext.P3 notice dated 07.10.2025, under Section 13 (2) of the SARFAESI Act, in respect of the loan availed by the 1^st petitioner company against Property Account No.HE1OCI00000036216. In the writ petition, it is stated that, due to severe financial hardship, the petitioner could not remit the monthly installments in time.

3. On 11.12.2025, when W.P.(C)No.44529 of 2025 came up for admission, the learned Single Judge granted an interim order, which reads thus;

“The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Bank seeks time to file a statement showing the amount due and the amount already remitted in respect of the loan. For deciding the maintainability of the writ petition, to consider the prayers seeking installment facility and regarding the willingness of the Bank to regularize the account, and since the Bank is proposing to take physical possession of the property, the coercive steps against the petitioners shall be deferred for a period of eight weeks on condition that the petitioners remit an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) within a period of one month from today. It is made clear that if the payment is not made, the respondents will be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.”

4. On 17.12.2025, the 2^nd respondent in W.P.(C)No.44529 of 2025, i.e., the Authorised Officer of the 1^st respondent NBFC filed a counter affidavit, opposing the reliefs sought for in that writ petition, producing therewith Ext.R2(a) statement of account of the loan availed by the 1^st petitioner company against Property Account No.HE1OCI00000036216. Along with that counter affidavit, the respondents have also filed I.A.No.1 of 2025 seeking an order to vacate the aforesaid interim order dated 11.12.2025. In the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.1 of 2025, which is one sworn to by the Authorised Officer of the