RADHA KASHYAP vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010418742026 2026:CGHC:46890
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 5626 of 2026
1 - Radha Kashyap W/o Late Raydhar Kashyap Aged About 48 Years R/o
House No. 85, Ward No. 11, Gandhi Chowk, Post - Chhindgarh, Village -
Chhindgarh, District - Sukma (C.G.)
2 - Gaurav Kashyap S/o Late Raydhar Kashyap Aged About 26 Years R/o
House No. 85, Ward No. 11, Gandhi Chowk, Post - Chhindgarh, Village -
Chhindgarh, District - Sukma (C.G.)
3 - Saurabh Kashyap S/o Late Raydhar Kashyap Aged About 28 Years R/o
House No. 85, Ward No. 11, Gandhi Chowk, Post - Chhindgarh, Village -
Chhindgarh, District - Sukma (C.G.)
4 - Rishabh Kashyap S/o Late Raydhar Kashyap Aged About 21 Years R/o
House No. 85, Ward No. 11, Gandhi Chowk, Post - Chhindgarh, Village -
Chhindgarh, District - Sukma (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Revenue And Disaster
Manager, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District -
Raipur (C.G.)
2 - Collector And District Magistrate Sukma, District - Sukma (C.G.)
3 - Director Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, Mahadev Ghat Road, Sundar
Nagar, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.), Corporate Office - Sector-24, Plot No.
47, Village - Tuta, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) Pin –
492018
4 - Chief Manager / Regional Manager Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank,
Regional Office - Jagdalpur, Opposite - P.G. College Ground, Beside Bastar

2
Library, Dharampura, No. 2 Chitrakot Road, Jagdalpur, District - Bastar (C.G.)
Pin – 494001
5 - Branch Manager Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, Branch - Chhindgarh,
District - Sukma (C.G.)
6 - Rajendra Kumar Nirmalkar S/o Chatur Singh Nirmalkar Aged About 40
Years R/o Hospital Colony, Post - Chhindgarh, Village - Chhindgarh, District -
Sukma (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioners : Mr. Chandrabhushan Kesharwani and Ms. Mandwi
Bharadwaj, Advocates
For State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, GA
Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board
05/11/2026
1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioners are challenging the
order dated 17.08.2026 passed by respondent No. 2 under Section 14 of
the SARFAESI Act, 2002, whereby an order for taking physical
possession of the secured asset has been passed for recovery of Rs.
19,96,322/- along with interest in respect of the housing loan availed by
deceased Raydhar Kashyap. The petitioners, therefore, pray for the
following relief(s):-
“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
quash the impugned order dated 17.08.2026 (Annexure
P/1) passed by the respondent No.2 and also quash the
proceedings initiated under SARFAESI Act, 2002.
10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
issue appropriate writ, order or direction to quash the
proceeding of SARFAESI Act by giving sufficient time to
consider the application filed on dated 08.10.2026 for
one time settlement or restructure of the loan (borrowed
amount) against the secured asset.

3
10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
grant any other relief/relief's in favour of the petitioners,
which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts
and circumstances of the case.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that by way of the impugned
order, respondent No. 2 has directed the petitioners to hand over physical
possession of the secured asset in respect of the housing loan availed by
deceased Raydhar Kashyap. He submits that the petitioners intend to
settle the loan account and therefore, seek some time to approach the
concerned authority. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits
that since the D.R.T., Jabalpur (M.P.) is presently not functioning, they
are unable to avail the statutory remedy available to them under the
SARFAESI Act, 2002. It is, therefore, contended that the order passed
against the petitioners deserves to be stayed, as they cannot be left
remediless on account of the non-functioning of the D.R.T. Jabalpur.
3. Learned counsel for the State submits that, in view of the Gazette
Notification dated 02.06.2026 published by the Govt. of India, Ministry
of Finance the matters falling within the jurisdiction of D.R.T., Jabalpur
(M.P.) are to be taken up by D.R.T.-2, Ahmedabad for a period of six
months or till the appointment of a regular Presiding Officer, or until
further orders, whichever is earlier. It is further submitted that a
Presiding Officer has already been designated to preside over D.R.T.-2,
Ahmedabad. Therefore, the petitioners have an efficacious alternative
remedy and as such, they may be directed to approach D.R.T.-2,
Ahmedabad for redressal of their grievance.

4
4. On this note, counsel for the petitioners submit that they may be granted
15 days’ time to file appropriate application before the D.R.T.-2,
Ahmedabad, however, till then some interim protection may be granted
in favour of the petitioners.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it appears that by the
notification dated 02.06.2026, the Additional Charge of D.R.T., Jabalpur
has been assigned to D.R.T.-2 Ahmedabad. Therefore, the petitioners
have the recourse of availing the statutory remedy available to them
under the SARFAESI Act, 2002 before D.R.T.-2, Ahmedabad.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the
petitioners to approach D.R.T.-2, Ahmedabad by filing appropriate
proceedings, including applications for listing and interim relief within a
period of 15 days from today.
6. Till 15 days from today, respondents are directed not to take any
coercive steps against the petitioners.
7. It is, however, made clear that the petitioners shall approach the Tribunal
without delay and shall not seek any adjournment on the ground that he
is protected by the interim orders passed by this Court.
8. The D.R.T.-2, Ahmedabad shall consider the petitioners’ application for
interim relief/stay and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance
with law, as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Priyanka