IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA

th

ON THE 17 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 MISC. PETITION No. 931 of 2026 AAVAS FINANCIERS LTD THROUGH AUTHORISED OFFICER SHRI JAGDEV SINGH Versus SANDESH CHATURVEDI AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Sunil Gupta - Advocate for the petitioner.

ORDER Per: Justice Anand Pathak Petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :-

(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, including a writ of certiorari, quashing and setting aside the impugned order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate in the Application filed by the Petitioner under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, as being illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction;

(ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, including a writ of mandamus, directing the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to pass order under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act for granting assistance for taking possession of the secured/mortgaged property in terms of Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 within a time-

bound period ;

(iii) Any other order which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances, may also be accorded in favor of the Petitioner.

2. It is the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that an application seeking assistance for taking possession of the mortgaged property was filed before the CJM, which was dismissed vide order dt.22.05.2025 on the ground of mentioning incorrect facts of property in the application. It is submitted that the learned CJM while passing the impugned order ignored the provisions of Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstrution of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter shall be referred to as 'the SARFAESI Act') and travelled beyond the scope of consideration under Section 14. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended thereto.

4. Since petitioner has not referred all particulars required under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, therefore, it appears that learned court below passed the impugned order.

5. Particulars of properties and other details are required to be given correctly and in correct format. If the facts are narrated correctly, then only C.J.M. Court/D.M. Court may proceed as per law. Therefore, in given facts and circumstances of the case, if the petitioner again proceed as per Section 13 (2) and Section 13 (4) of the SARFAESI Act and thereafter approach D.M. Court under Section 14 of Act, 2002, then said shall be considered in accordance with law and on its own merits.

6. With the aforesaid, petition stands disposed of.

(ANAND PATHAK) (ANIL VERMA)

JUDGE JUDGE SP