Dismissed¶15

Shaheen Liykat Khan v. Bank of Baroda and Ors.

Bombay HC8 Jan 2026WP/5658/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition No. 5658 of 2025, Bombay High Court, dismissed; SARFAESI Act Section 14 Magistrate possession order; borrower trespass into secured flat; Bank of Baroda possession; securitisation application pending before Debts Recovery Tribunal; prayer to set aside co-ordinate Division Bench order dated 06.01.2025 in Writ Petition No. 17831 of 2024; liberty to bank to act in accordance with law; Shaheen Liykat Khan v. Bank of Baroda; maintainability of writ petition during pending DRT proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Since the securitisation application filed by the petitioner is pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the Court declined to make further comments and held that the present petition cannot be entertained for the prayers made in the petition. ¶14

Shaheen Liykat Khan vs Bank of Baroda and Ors. — Banking and Recovery | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

12_WP_5658_25.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5658 OF 2025

¶3

Shaheen Liykat Khan	…	Petitioner
vs.
Bank of Baroda and others	…	Respondents

¶4

Mr. Mohd. Parwez Alam, i/b. Mr. Sanjeev Mishra for petitioner. Mr. Yogesh J. Mishra a/w. Mr. Madhur Rai, i/b. PRS Legal for respondent No.1-bank.

¶5

Mr. A. A. Alaspurkar, AGP for respondent Nos.2 and 3-State.

¶6

CORAM : MANISH PITALE & SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ DATE : 16^th FEBRUARY, 2026

¶7

P.C. :

¶8

. By this petition, the petitioner is seeking an order to restrain the respondent No.1-bank from taking possession of the subject property.

¶9

Surprisingly, a prayer is made before this Bench in terms of prayer clause (b), to set aside an order of a co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court dated 06.01.2025 passed in Writ Petition No.17831 of 2024, which was filed by the said respondent. In the said petition, the respondent No.1-bank was constrained to approach this Court, as the petitioner herein had trespassed into and taken possession of the subject flat, in respect of which the said respondent had been put in possession, following execution of an order passed by the competent Magistrate under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Securitisation Act).

¶10

PRIYA Digitally signedby PRIYAKAMBLI KAMBLI Date:2026.02.1617:38:03 +0530

1/2

12_WP_5658_25.doc

Priya Kambli

Since securitisation application filed by the petitioner is pending before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, we would not like to make further comments in the matter. We are of the opinion that the present petition cannot be entertained for the prayers made in the petition.

¶15

Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

¶16

Respondent No.1 is at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law, including in terms of order dated 06.01.2025 passed in Writ Petition No.17831 of 2024.

¶17

(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J)

¶18

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

¶19

2/2

Shaheen Liykat Khan v. Bank of Baroda and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaheen Liykat Khan v. Bank of Baroda and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bharati G Patel and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Government Pleader and Ors.

Rakesh Dixit vs State of Maharashtra

Icici Home Finance Company Ltd. and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Honble District Magistrate, Pune and Ors.

Bharati G Patel and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Government Pleader and Ors.

Bharati G Patel and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Government Pleader and Ors.

Bharati G Patel and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Government Pleader and Ors.