SMT. LALITA BAI JAIN vs INDIA SHELTER FINANCE CORPORATION LTD.

1

CGHC010428782026 2026:CGHC:46268
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 5477 of 2026
1 - Smt. Lalita Bai Jain W/o Late Shri Ashok Jain Aged About 60 Years
R/o. H.No. 34 Ward No. 26, Dabal Print Chir Bangla Marg Kawardha,
Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.)
2 - Alok Jain S/o Late Shri Ashok Jain Aged About 36 Years R/o. H.No.
Digitally
signed by
VISHAKHA
BEOHAR
VISHAKHA
BEOHAR
34 Ward No. 26, Dabal Print Chir Bangla Marg Kawardha, Distt.
Kabirdham (C.G.)
3 - Alesh Jain S/o Late Shri Ashok Jain Aged About 30 Years R/o. H.No.
34 Ward No. 26, Dabal Print Chir Bangla Marg Kawardha, Distt.
Kabirdham (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - India Shelter Finance Corporation Ltd. Through Its Authorised
Officer, 2nd Floor, Chawla Tower, Shankar Nagar, Uppar Portion Of
Radio Mirchi, Raipur 492001 (C.G.)
2 - The Tahsildar Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.)
... Respondents
(Cause-title taken from the Case Information System)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Petitioner :- Mr. Niraj Baghel, Advocate
For State :- Mr. Avinash Chand Sahu, Dy. A.G.
For Respondent No. 2 :- Mr. Amit Nayak, Advocate

2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order On Board
02.11.2026
1. By way of the present petition, the petitioners have called in
question the legality and validity of the ex parte order dated
11.09.2026 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Kawardha, District Kabirdham (C.G.), whereby directions have
been issued for taking possession of the property belonging to the
petitioners. The petitioners contend that the impugned
proceedings have been initiated and carried out without affording
them an opportunity of hearing and without due consideration of
the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking following
appropriate reliefs :-
“ 10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of
the petitioner,
10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to Restrain Respondent NO. 2 from taking physical
possession of the subject land in pursuance of the
order dated 11.09.2026 (Annexure P-1), in the
interest of justice.
10.3 To kindly make any other order or Writ that
may be deemed fit and just in the facts and

3
circumstances of the case including awarding of the
costs to the petitioner.
10.4 Any other relief order or direction which may
deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of
the case including the cost of the petition.”
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 11.09.2026, whereby,
while deciding the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI
Act, 2002, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has directed the
delivery of possession of the secured asset to the respondent-
finance company. He further submits that the petitioners have
already preferred a securitisation appeal, registered as Diary No.
3639/2026, which is pending consideration. However, on account
of the non-functioning of the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT) in an
effective manner, the securitisation appeal, along with the
application for interim relief, could not be taken up for hearing. It is
further submitted that the matters pertaining to DRT, Jabalpur, are
presently being dealt with by DRT, Ahmedabad (In-charge DRT,
Jabalpur). Therefore, learned counsel prays that some interim
protection may be granted to the petitioners so that no coercive
steps are taken against them by the respondent-finance company
until the securitisation appeal along with the application for interim
relief is taken up for consideration.
4. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for
the petitioners and the fact that the securitisation appeal bearing

4
Diary No. 3639/2026 is already pending consideration before the
competent Tribunal, this Court is of the view that the petitioners
may approach the Tribunal by filing an appropriate application
seeking urgent hearing of the securitisation appeal along with the
application for interim relief.
5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the
petitioners to file an appropriate application seeking urgent
hearing before the DRT, Ahmedabad (In-charge DRT, Jabalpur),
within a period of 15 days from today. In the meanwhile,
considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the
respondents are directed not to take any coercive steps against
the petitioners for a period of 15 days from today.
6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the securitisation appeal, and the Tribunal shall
consider the application for urgent hearing and the application for
interim relief in accordance with law.
7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition stands
disposed of.
sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Vishakha