[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Khemlata Bakat vs Hinduja Housing Finance Limited ... on 10 April, 2026
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28294
1 WP-11938-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL
ON THE 10th OF APRIL, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 11938 of 2026
SMT. KHEMLATA BAKAT
Versus
HINDUJA HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED BALAGHAT AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Eshaan Datt - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Ritwik Parashar - Govt. Advocate for the respondents/State.
ORDER
Per: Justice Vivek Rusia
By way of present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking following
reliefs:-
(i) That, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue
writ/directions/orders to the respondents in the nature of certiorari
and quash the impugned order dated 26-07-2025 passed by CJM,
Balaghat in MJCR/322/2025 ([Hinduja Housing Finance Limited,
Branch - Balaghat, District Balaghat vs. Smt. Khemlata Bakat &
another] contained in Annexure-P/5, in the interest of justice;
(ii) That, this Hon'ble Court be kind enough to quash the
consequential proceedings dated 24-02-2026 being initiated by the
Tehsildar, Waraseoni, District Balaghat, pursuant to the impugned
order dated 26-07-2025 passed in MJCR No.322/2025 (Annexure-
P/5) vide Annexure-P/6;
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28294
2 WP-11938-2026
(iii) That, this Hon'ble Court be further pleased to direct the
respondents to conduct a just and proper inquiry against the
authorized agent of the House Finance Company, namely,
Dhananjay Uike (Mobile No.9753786564), who defrauded the
petitioners and misappropriated the EMIs so collected by him
from the petitioners, as detailed in Annexure-P/I and Annexure-
P/2 towards repayment house loan.
(iv) That, this Hon'ble Court be kind enough to direct the
respondent No.1 to reconcile loan account after considering
payments already made by the petitioners towards repayment of
loan amount.
(v) That, this Hon'ble Court be kind enough to issue
writ/directions/orders in the nature of mandamus directing the
respondents to maintain status quo with respect to the secured
asset/mortgaged properties till final adjudication of this writ
petition.
(vi) That, this Hon'ble Court be kind enough to grant liberty to the
petitioner to approach the Debts Recovery Tribunal or any
alternative forum, as and when it becomes functional;
(vii) That, this Hon'ble Court further be pleased to direct the
respondent No.1 from creating any third-party interest till final
adjudication of the matter.
(viii) That, this Hon'ble Court be kind enough to grant such other
relief/reliefs to the petitioner as deemed just and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case.
2. Shri Eshaan Datt, Advocate submits that at present, there is no
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28294
3 WP-11938-2026
Presiding Officer at DRT.
3. Shri Ritwik Parashar, Govt. Advocate appearing on behalf of
respondents/State on advance notice submits that a similar situation came up
before this Court in the year 2021 also, when there was no Presiding Officer
and various writ petitions were filed before this Court. In one of the writ
petitions being W.P. No.25138/2021 (M/s Divyadeep Sugar and Industries
Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. India Bank and Others), this Court vide order dated
23.11.2021 has issued certain directions to be followed by the borrower as
well as by the Bank/Financial Institutions.
3. Considering the aforesaid submissions and order passed in W.P
No.25138/2021, we hereby dispose of the present writ petition with the
following directions:-
(i) Without prejudice to any of the rights of the parties, the petitioner is
directed to deposit 20% of the amount due as on date with the
respondent/bank within a period of 30 days from today, subject to further
orders that may be passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Jabalpur. 50%
out of the aforesaid 20% amount, be deposited within a period of 1st
fortnight.
(ii) The petitioner shall file Securitization Application within 15 days.
The Presiding Officer of DRT is directed to take-up the S.A. as soon as it
becomes functional for consideration of prayer for interim relief and take a
decision in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. The
respondents shall not put the property to auction till the application for
interim relief is decided by the Presiding Officer of DRT.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:28294
4 WP-11938-2026
(iii) Till the prayer for interim relief in the said S.A. is decided by the
DRT, no coercive action be taken against the petitioner subject to
compliance of direction No.1 as above.
(iv) The petitioner is directed to communicate this order to the
Registrar, DRT, Jabalpur within seven working days from today.
(v) If there is excessive delay at any stage of the proceedings including
in the appointment of Presiding Officer of DRT, Jabalpur or any other DRTs
given Additional Charge, parties are free to approach this Court.
(vi) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the case.
(vii) The auction purchaser, if any, as well as respondent/Bank shall
follow the procedure as per Rule 9(1) of the Security Interest (Enforcement
Rules), 2002 under the SARFAESI Act, 2002.
4. The writ petition is disposed off with the aforesaid directions.
5. C.C., as per rules.
(VIVEK RUSIA) (PRADEEP MITTAL)
JUDGE JUDGE
Shruti
