Allowed

Yes Bank Ltd. v. Vishwanath Baghel

Chhattisgarh HC16 Sept 2026WPC/4715/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, Yes Bank Ltd. sought a direction for respondent authorities to assist in the physical repossession of secured assets located in Raipur under an order dated 08.08.2025 passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. The Court, noting the inaction of the State officials, directed them to take necessary steps to assist the petitioner in securing possession within 45 days, subject to complying with the order and relevant laws. The Court explicitly reserved its opinion on the merits of the claim itself.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent authorities to assist the petitioner in securing physical repossession of secured assets under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act within 45 days, subject to relevant legal formalities.

Yes Bank Ltd. Vs Vishwanath Baghel — Banking and Recovery | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

RUCHI Digitallysigned by YADAV RUCHIYADAV

CGHC010345982026

2026:CGHC:40554

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

WPC No. 4715 of 2026

¶8

1 - Yes Bank Ltd. Through Its Authorised Officer, Shri Nikhil Kumar Vyas, S/o Suresh Kumar Vyas, Aged About 40 Years, Presently Working As Vice President Collection At Yes Bank Ltd., At Tagore Nagar, 4th Floor, Pujari Chambers, Near Pachpedi Naka, Raipur (C.G.) Pin - 492001

¶9

... Petitioner(s)

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - Vishwanath Baghel R/o Khasra No. 566/8, P. H. No. 109, Khata No. 320 (Part- 4), Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Ward No. 27, Mowa, Tehsil And District - Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

2 - State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, District - Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

3 - The Tehsildar, District - Raipur (C.G.)

¶14

4 - The Superintendent Of Police District - Raipur (C.G.)

¶15

5 - Station House Officer, P. S. Pandari Mova, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)

¶16

... Respondent(s)

¶17

( Cause title taken from CIS Periphery)

¶18

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vedant Bhelonde, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Abhishek Gupta, P.L.

¶19

¶20

SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶21

Order on Board

¶22

17/09/2026

¶23

By way of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-

¶24

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to assist the petitioner in taking repossession of the secured assets (situated at Mauza Mowa, Khasra No. 566/8, P.H. No. 109, Khata No. 320 (Part-4), Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Nagar, Ward No. 27, Tehsil and District Raipur (C.G.), together with the building constructed thereon) in light of the order dated 08.08.2025 in a time-bound manner.

¶25

10.2 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, in the interest of justice.”

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there has been an inordinate and unexplained delay on the part of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in assisting the petitioner in securing physical possession/repossession of the secured assets, despite the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act authorizing the concerned Tehsildar to take possession. It is further submitted that the respondent authorities are statutorily obliged to extend necessary assistance in securing and, if required, restoring possession of the secured assets to the petitioner, and their inaction is frustrating the very object of the SARFAESI Act and adversely affecting the petitioner’s right to recover the secured debt. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has

¶27

¶28

approached the respondent authorities for compliance with the order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, but no effective action has been taken till date. It is contended that the mere fact that possession had earlier been taken pursuant to the said order would not, by itself, preclude the authorities from assisting the secured creditor in securing possession again, if the secured asset has subsequently been re-possessed by the debtor. On these grounds, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the respondent authorities be directed to take necessary steps for securing and handing over physical possession of the secured assets to the petitioner in accordance with law.

¶29

Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that there is no objection to the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶30

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record as well as considering the limited prayer made on behalf of the petitioner, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present petition with a direction to the respondent authorities to take necessary steps, in accordance with law, for assisting the petitioner in securing physical possession/re-possession of the secured assets in terms of the order dated 08.08.2025 passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act.

¶31

The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken expeditiously, preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, subject to the petitioner fulfilling all requisite formalities and complying with the applicable provisions of law.

¶32

¶33

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s claim. The respondent authorities shall take necessary action strictly in accordance with law.

¶34

6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of.

¶35

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)

¶36

Judge

¶37

Ruchi

Yes Bank Ltd. v. Vishwanath Baghel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yes Bank Ltd. v. Vishwanath Baghel

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases