Disposed¶42

PNB Housing Finance Ltd. v. Neelu Agrawal

Chhattisgarh HC5 Jan 2026WP227/1379/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

SARFAESI Act Section 14; proviso to Section 14; thirty-day and sixty-day statutory time limit; taking possession of secured assets; account declared NPA; delay in disposal of Section 14 application; Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate / Chief judicial Magistrate Raipur; direction to conclude pending Section 14 proceeding within further 60 days; affidavit by authorised officer of secured creditor; Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; WP227 No. 1379 of 2025; Sachin Singh Rajput; 06/01/2026; PNB Housing Finance Ltd.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur to conclude the pending Section 14 SARFAESI Act proceeding preferably within a further period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the Order; Writ Petition disposed of with the aforesaid direction(s). ¶42

PNB Housing Finance Ltd. Vs Neelu Agrawal — Banking and Recovery | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶42

Issue for consideration

Whether the Section 14 SARFAESI Act proceeding pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur, which has remained unconcluded though the statutory period under the proviso to Section 14 (thirty days, extendable upon recording reasons to an aggregate of sixty days) has lapsed, should be directed to be concluded within a further period of 60 days.

¶18

Court's answer

As provided by the proviso to Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, when a Section 14 proceeding is moved, the concerned Officer shall, after satisfying the contents of the affidavit, pass suitable orders for taking possession of the secured assets within thirty days from the date of application and, failing that, after recording reasons in writing, within such further period not exceeding sixty days in aggregate.

¶40

Ratio / Principle

Prima facie, the documents in the instant case show that the sixty-day period prescribed under the proviso to Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act had already elapsed much before.

¶41

Key takeaways

The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur is expected to conclude the pending Section 14 SARFAESI Act proceeding preferably within a further period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the Order.ratio¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (WP227 No. 1379 of 2025), High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, order dated 06/01/2026 by Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput. PNB Housing Finance Ltd. submitted that, the borrowers' account having been declared an NPA, its application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur (C.G.) had not been concluded although about three months had elapsed, notwithstanding that the proviso to Section 14 requires suitable orders for taking possession of secured assets within thirty days of the application, extendable upon recording reasons in writing to a further period not exceeding sixty days in aggregate. Prima facie finding that the sixty days had already elapsed much before, the Court held the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur expected to conclude the Section 14 proceeding preferably within a further period of 60 days from receipt of a copy of the Order, and disposed of the Writ Petition with these directions.

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

WP227 No. 1379 of 2025

¶5

Digitally signed by PAWAN PAWAN KUMAR KUMAR Date:2026.01.06 14:49:17 +0530

¶6

1 - Pnb Housing Finance Ltd. Registered Office No. 111-112, 1st Floor, Plot No. 1, Block No. 9, D B Corporate Park, Rajbandh Ground, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001 Through Their Authorized Manager, Vijay Singh Thakur, S/o V.B. Singh Thakur, Aged About 41 Years, R/o 3rd Floor, Neelay Iconic, Shankar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) - 492001.

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - Neelu Agrawal R/o House No. 101, Ashiyana Apartment, New Shanti Nagar, Raipur C.G.

¶10

2 - Kamal Kishore R/o House No. 101, Ashiyana Apartment, New Shanti Nagar, Raipur C.G. ... Respondent(s)

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya Chopra, Advocate

¶12

Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

06/01/2026

¶15

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the procedure contemplated under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, ‘the SARFAESI Act') was commenced against the borrowers as their account was declared as NonPerforming Asset (NPA). An application under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act, has been filed before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur (C.G.)

¶16

According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the proviso to Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act provides that the decision on like nature of the application has to be

¶17

¶18

made within a period of 30 days and, if not so, within a further period of 60 days. However, despite the fact that about 03 months has elapsed, the proceeding under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act has not been concluded by the Chief judicial Magistrate, Raipur (C.G.).

¶19

For ready reference, the proviso to Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act is reproduced herein under:-

¶20

“[Provided that any application by the secured creditor shall be accompanied by an affidavit duly affirmed by the authorized officer of the secured creditor, declaring that-

¶21

i. the aggregate amount of financial assistance granted and the total claim of the Bank as on the date of filing the application;

¶22

ii. The borrower has created security interest over various properties and that the Bank or Financial Institution is holding a valid and subsisting security interest over such properties and the claim of the Bank or Financial Institution is within the limitation period;

¶23

iii. the borrower has created security interest over various properties giving the details of properties referred to in sub-clause (ii) above;

¶24

iv The SARFAESI Act provides that when Section 14 proceeding is moved, the concerned Officer shall, after satisfying the contents of the affidavit, pass suitable orders for the purpose of taking possession of the secured assets within a period of thirty days from the date of application and, if he fails to do it, then after recording reasons in writing for the same, pass the order within such further period but not exceeding in aggregate sixty days.he borrower has committed default in repayment of the financial assistance granted aggregating the specified amount;

¶25

v. consequent upon such default in repayment of the financial assistance the account of the borrower has been classified as a nonperforming asset;

¶26

vi. affirming that the period of sixty days notice as required by the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 13, demanding payment of the defaulted financial assistance has been served on the borrower;

¶27

vii. the objection or representation in reply to the notice received from the borrower has been considered by the secured creditor and reasons for non-acceptance of such objection or representation had been communicated to the borrower;

¶28

vii. the borrower has not made any repayment of the financial assistance in spite of the above notice and the Authorised Officer is, therefore, entitled to take possession of the secured assets under the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 13 read with section 14 of the principal Act;

¶29

viii. that the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder had been complied with:

¶30

Provided further that on receipt of the affidavit from the Authorised Officer, the District Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, shall after satisfying the contents of the affidavit pass suitable orders for the purpose of taking possession of the secured assets within a period of thirty days from the date of

¶31

¶32

application.]

¶33

[Provided [also] that if no order is passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate within the said period of thirty days for reasons beyond his control, he may, after recording reasons in writing for the same, pass the order within such further period but not exceeding in aggregate sixty days.]

¶34

Provided also that the requirement of filing affidavit stated in the first proviso shall not apply to proceeding pending before any District Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, on the date of commencement of this Act.]

¶35

[(1A) The District Magistrate or the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate may authorise any officer subordinate to him,-

¶36

(i) to take possession of such assets and documents relating thereto; and

¶37

(ii) to forward such assets and documents to the secured creditor.]

¶38

(2)For the purpose of securing compliance with the provisions of sub-section (1), the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate of the District Magistrate may take or cause to be taken such steps and use, or cause to be used, such force, as may, in his opinion, be necessary.

¶39

(3)No act of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or the District Magistrate [any officer authorised by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate or District Magistrate] done in pursuance of this section shall be called in question in any court or before any authority.”

¶40

The SARFAESI Act provides that when Section 14 proceeding is moved, the concerned Officer shall, after satisfying the contents of the affidavit, pass suitable orders for the purpose of taking possession of the secured assets within a period of thirty days from the date of application and, if he fails to do it, then after recording reasons in writing for the same, pass the order within such further period but not exceeding in aggregate sixty days.

¶41

Prima facie, the documents, in the instant case, show that the sixty days have already elapsed much before; therefore, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur is expected to conclude the proceeding under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act preferably within a further period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.

¶42

With aforesaid direction(s), this Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶43

Sd/-

¶44

(Sachin Singh Rajput)

¶45

JUDGE

¶46

Pawan

PNB Housing Finance Ltd. v. Neelu Agrawal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

PNB Housing Finance Ltd. v. Neelu Agrawal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Laxmi Bai Vs Brijlal and others

Luvkumar Sharma, Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shri Kartik Ram (Died) Through Lrs Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

PNB Housing Finance Ltd. Vs Abhinav Shandilya

Kalli Begam Mansuri Vs Mahendra kUMAR Gurjar

Icici Home Finance Company Limited Vs Deepak Wadhwani