[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd. vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 30 January, 2026
Author: Manish Pitale
Bench: Manish Pitale
bipin prithiani
1
904-wp-688.26.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 688 OF 2026
Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd. ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (ST.) NO. 2097 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 688 OF 2026
******
Mr. Omar Khaiyam Shaikh a/w Mr. Vikas Salvi, Mr. Sahil Salvi,
Ms. Ayman Khan, Mr. Shahzad Ansari and Mr. Manohar Shelar
i/by Vikas Salvi & Associates for the Petitioner.
Mr. O. A. Chanduarkar, Addl. G. P., a/w Shri A. A. Alaspurkar,
AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2-Sate.
Mr. P. C. Shah h/f Rahil A. Siddiqui Respondent Nos.3 & 4.
******
CORAM : MANISH PITALE AND
SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.
DATE : 30th JANUARY 2026
P.C. :
. By order dated 16th January 2026, in this writ petition, while
issuing specific direction, we had made the following
observations :
"5. We find that the said order was passed under the
provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of
Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002 (SARFAESI Act). It appears that in the interregnum, the
respondent-borrowers had initiated a plethora of proceedings,
due to which the order could not be immediately put to
bipin prithiani
904-wp-688.26.doc
execution. But, as on today, the proceedings have been
appropriately dealt with and there is no impediment for
execution of the said order. In that light, we find substance in
the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner that as on
today, there is no reason why immediate steps ought not to be
taken by respondent Nos.1 and 2 to provide necessary Police
assistance, so that the order dated 10 th October 2022 passed
by the Magistrate is duly executed.
6. If such orders are not executed with promptitude, it
would certainly adversely affect the rule of law.
7. Hence, we direct respondent Nos.1 and 2 to provide all
necessary Police assistance to the petitioner to execute
forthwith the order dated 10th October 2022.
8. We expect the order to be executed and possession to
be handed over to the petitioner before the next date of
listing.
9. List the petition for further consideration/disposal on
27 January 2026, to be included in the supplementary list.
th
10. In the meanwhile, the respondents who are appearing
through Advocates, are permitted to file their reply affidavits.
11. All parties to act on an authenticated copy of this
order."
2. The aforesaid order directed the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to
ensure that proper police assistance was provided to the petitioner,
so that possession of the subject property was handed over to the
petitioner on or before next date of listing, which was 27 th January
2026.
3. The said order dated 16th January 2026 passed by this Court
was challenged by respondent Nos.3 and 4 by filing Special Leave
Petition (Civil) No. 3472 of 2026. On 27 th January 2026, the
Supreme Court dismissed the writ petition on the first date of
bipin prithiani
904-wp-688.26.doc
listing, refusing to interfere with the aforesaid order dated 16 th
January 2026 passed by this Court.
4. Despite clear direction contained in the above quoted
portion of our order dated 16 th January 2026, we are informed
that Mr. Vilas Rane, Senior Inspector of N. M. Joshi Marg Police
Station, Mumbai, insisted upon the petitioner to give chronology
of events with supporting documents when the petitioner
approached the said Police Station for appropriate Police aid to
abide by the direction contained in the above quoted portion of
our order dated 16th January 2026. On 24th January 2026, the
petitioner was constrained to provide detailed chronology of
events along with supporting documents to the said Mr. Vilas
Rane, Senior Inspector of N. M. Marg Police Station, Mumbai.
Despite the petitioner providing all necessary documents and in
the face of the specific direction given by this Court in the order
dated 16th January 2026, the said Police Station failed to provide
Police assistance to the petitioner. As a consequence, direction
contained in our order dated 16th January 2026 has not been
complied with. We find that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the
Senior Inspector of the N. M. Joshi Marg Police Station, Mumbai,
have shown scant regard for the order of this Court.
5. In view of the above, we direct respondent No.2 i.e. the
Deputy Commissioner of Police (Law and Order), to personally
supervise the handing over of the possession of the subject
property to the petitioner before the next date, as we shall specify
bipin prithiani
904-wp-688.26.doc
herein below. We are constrained to issue the direction to such a
Senior Officer for the reason that specific direction contained in
our order dated 16th January 2026 has not been complied with.
We also find the conduct of the Senior Inspector of N. M. Joshi
Marg Police Station, Mumbai, to be reprehensible and it needs to
be dealt with appropriately.
6. Accordingly, we direct that the petitioner shall be put in
possession of the subject property by the respondent Nos.1 and 2
with assistance of the Senior Inspector of N. M. Joshi Marg Police
Station, Mumbai, on or before 1st February 2026. As indicated
hereinabove, the respondent No.2-Deputy Commissioner of Police
(Law and Order) shall personally supervise the said operation and
issue necessary directions for providing sufficient police assistance
to the petitioner to take possession of the subject property. The
Senior Inspector, N. M. Joshi Marg Police Station, Mumbai, shall
ensure that sufficient police aid is provided to the petitioner and
possession of the subject property is indeed handed over on or
before the date, indicated hereinabove.
7. In any case, Mr. Vilas Rane, Senior Inspector of N. M. Joshi
Marg Police Station, Mumbai, shall remain personally present in
this Court on 3rd February 2026.
8. List this petition for further consideration/directions on 3 rd
February 2026, to be included in the supplementary list.
9. It appears that in terms of order dated 16 th January 2026,
bipin prithiani
904-wp-688.26.doc
appropriate amendment was not carried out in the cause title. The
said amendment shall be carried out forthwith.
10. All parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.
(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.)
