Yogesh Ashok Patil and Anr. vs Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Yogesh Ashok Patil and Anr. vs Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Co. Ltd. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim/notice-stage order, not a final adjudication: (i) notice to the respondent returnable on 21st July 2025, with private notice additionally permitted; (ii) till the next date, petitioners not to be dispossessed from the secured assets; (iii) respondent to furnish the list of documents to the petitioners expeditiously and within one week from receipt of such application; (iv) liberty to apply in case of difficulty.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners — who face a DRT Pune order directing handover of possession of the secured assets by 30th June 2025, while conceding that a remedy of appeal exists before the DRAT — should receive interim protection from dispossession, given their willingness to pay the entire dues and the presence of a buyer ready to pay more than the recoverable dues. +1 more

Court's answer

Although counsel fairly submitted that the remedy of appeal lies before the DRAT, and the Court would ordinarily have directed the petitioners to file such an appeal, the Court considered the petitioners willing to pay the entire dues with a buyer ready to pay more than the recoverable dues and therefore inclined, in the interest of justice, to protect the petitioners for a limited period.

Ratio / Principle

Notice was issued to the respondent, returnable on 21st July 2025 (private notice in addition to court notice being permitted), and as interim protection it was directed that, till the next date, the petitioners shall not be dispossessed from the secured assets.

Key takeaways

Since the State Bank of India was represented as willing to sanction a loan enabling clearance of the outstanding dues, the respondent was directed to furnish the list of documents to the petitioners expeditiously and in any case within one week from the date of receipt of such application.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction — Writ Petition No. 8800 of 2025 (M.S. Karnik & N.R. Borkar, JJ.; P.C., 1st July 2025). Petitioners, facing a Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune order dated 25th June 2025 in I.A. No. 1846 of 2025 in S.A. No.264 of 2025 directing handover of possession of secured assets (ground floor plus first floor premises) to the respondent financier's authorised officer by 30th June 2025, sought a stay. Counsel conceded the appeal remedy before the DRAT; ordinarily the Court would have so directed them, but considering the petitioners were willing to pay the entire dues of Rs.41 lakhs by selling the secured assets and a buyer stood ready to pay more than the recoverable dues, the Court, in the interest of justice, extended limited-period protection: notice to the respondent returnable on 21st July 2025 (private notice permitted) and, till the next date, no dispossession of the petitioners from the secured assets. As the State Bank of India was willing to sanction a loan to clear the outstanding dues, the respondent was directed to furnish the list of documents within one week of receiving the application; liberty to apply in case of difficulty.

Digitally signed by DINESH DINESH SADANAND SADANAND SHERLA SHERLA Date: 2025.07.01 19:50:41 +0530

906-cwp-8800-25.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8800 OF 2025

Yogesh A. Patil & Anr. … Petitioners V/s. Cholamandlam Investment & Finance Company Ltd. … Respondent

Mr. Shrivallabh S. Panchpor a/w. Ms P.A. Borhade for the Petitioner.

CORAM : M.S. KARNIK &

N.R. BORKAR, J.J.

DATE : 1^st JULY, 2025.

P.C.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

By this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 25^th June 2025 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune (“DRT” for short) in I.A. No. 1846 of 2025 in S.A. No.264 of 2025. By the said order, petitioners are directed to hand over the possession of secured assets, i.e., premises of ground floor plus first floor on the plot of land to the authorised officer of respondent by 30^th June 2025.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are willing to pay the entire dues of Rs.41 lakhs,

1/3

DSS

906-cwp-8800-25.doc

by selling secured assets and there is a buyer who is ready to pay more than recoverable dues. It is submitted that as the petitioners are ready to pay the entire dues, the order of DRT, Pune directing to take the possession of the secured assets on or before 30^th June 2025 be stayed as the possession is not yet taken.

Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submitted that there is remedy of appeal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal Tribunal (“DRAT” for short). Ordinarily, we would have directed the petitioners to file an appeal before the DRAT, however, considering the petitioners are willing to pay the entire dues and there is a buyer who is ready to pay more than recoverable dues, in the interest of justice, we are inclined to protect the petitioners for a limited period. Hence, issue notice to the respondent, returnable on 21^st July 2025.

In addition to court notice, private notice on respondent is permitted.

Till the next date, the petitioners not to be dispossessed from the secured assets.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the State Bank of India is willing to sanction loan amount which would enable the petitioners to clear the outstanding dues. He, therefore, requests that the respondent be directed to furnish list of necessary documents. In this view of the matter, there should not be any impediment in directing the

2/3

DSS

906-cwp-8800-25.doc

respondent to furnish list of documents to the petitioners expeditiously and in any case within a period of one week from the date of receipt of such application.

Liberty to apply in case of difficulty.

(N.R. BORKAR, J.) (M.S. KARNIK, J.)

3/3

DSS