Disposed

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Padma Kriplani

Chhattisgarh HC17 Sept 2026MCC/871/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, in an Order on Board, restored a writ petition (WP227 No.641/2026) that had been dismissed for want of prosecution. The court, noting that the underlying matter concerns possession of property under the SARFAESI Act and requires adjudication on merits, permitted the application for restoration. The other miscellaneous application was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

The application for restoration of WP227 No.641/2026 was allowed and the petition was restored to its original number.

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited Vs Padma… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed SUMIT by SUMITKUMARDate: KUMAR 2026.09.1817:48:40 +0530

CGHC010347822026

2026:CGHC:40889

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

MCC No. 871 of 2026

¶8

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited Through Kuldeep Mathur S/o J.P. Mathur Aged About 33 Years Working As Senior Legal Manager Having Branch Office At Mukta Prayag Complex 3rd Floor, Pujari Complex, Pachpedi Naka, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 492001

¶9

... Petitioner(s)

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - Padma Kriplani W/o Bhijram Kriplani Aged About 66 Years R/o Ratakhar, Ganesh Chowk, Ward No. 2, Korba (Chhattisgarh)

¶12

2 - Rajesh Naagwani S/o Late Shri Gaagandas Naagwani Aged About 61 Years R/o House No. 681/1, Chikhli, Khairagarh Road, Ward No. 6, Rajnandgaon 491441, (Chhattisgarh)

¶13

3 - Rohit Naagwani S/o Shri Rajesh Naagwani Aged About 37 Years R/o House No. 683, Chikhli, Khairagarh Road, Ward No. 6, Rajnandgaon 491441, (Chhattisgarh)

¶14

4 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh)

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ritesh Sharma, Advocate appeared through Virtual Mode For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajkumar Sahu, P.L. for the State

¶17

(Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.)

¶18

Order on Board

¶19

18/09/2026

¶20

This is an application for restoration of the WP227 No.641/2026 which has been dismissed for want of prosecution on 07.08.2026.

¶21

¶22

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that due to unavoidable circumstances learned counsel appearing for the applicant could not appeared in the case when the matter was called for hearing and the same has been dismissed for want of prosecution on 07.08.2026.

¶23

The matter pertains to possession of subject property under the SARFAESI Act, which requires adjudication on merits, therefore, the matter may be heard on merits.

¶24

On due consideration upon the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and for the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and WP227 No. 641/2026 is restored to its original number.

¶25

The MCC is disposed of .

¶26

Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶27

Sumit

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Padma Kriplani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Padma Kriplani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases