Bombay High Court
NARESH JAGUMAL KARDAversusCANARA BANK AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
Physical possession of the property is deferred as the applicant has complied with the payment direction.
Summary
In an interim application arising out of Writ Petition No. 4728 of 2026, the High Court had earlier directed the applicant to pay Rs. 50,42,273 to Canara Bank by 3 October 2026, failing which physical possession of the subject property would be taken on 5 October 2026 with police assistance. The applicant complied by remitting Rs. 50,43,000 via RTGS on 3 October 2026, and the bank confirmed receipt. The bank sought possession citing past defaults, but the Court examined the terms of its earlier order and found that the condition for possession was the non‑payment of the amount. Since payment was effected, the Court held that the authority to take physical possession could not be exercised. Consequently, the Court deferred the possession and scheduled further hearing for the next day.
Issues considered
- Whether the Court may order physical possession of the property when the applicant has complied with the payment direction.
- Interpretation of the conditional clause in the order dated 28 September 2026 regarding possession.
Subjects
- writ petition
- physical possession
- bank loan
- RTGS payment
- court order
- interim relief
- civil procedure
Judgment
varsha P-5-IA-7627-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 7627 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 4728 OF 2026
Naresh Jagumal Karda .. Applicant
IN THE MATTER OF
Canara Bank and Ors. .. Petitioners
V/S.
The Commissioner of Police, .. Respondents
Digitally
Nashik and Ors.
signed by
VARSHA
VARSHA DEEPAK
DEEPAK GAIKWAD
GAIKWAD Date:
2026.10.06
10:36:32
+0530
-------------------
Mr. Mandar Soman a/w Omkar Kanegaonakar, Swapnil Balajiwale i.by
Vivek Phadke, for the applicants in IA/7627/2026 and for intervenor /
borrower in WP/4728/2026.
Ms. G.R. Raghuwanshi, AGP, for the State.
Ms. Rukshin Ghiara 9VC) i.by Saga Legal for the petitioner.
--------------------
CORAM : MANISH PITALE &
SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.
DATE : 5th OCTOBER 2026.
PC:
1. Not on board. Mentioned by way of praecipe.
2. This petition along with interim application is to be listed
tomorrow as per order dated 28th September 2026.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant is constrained to mention
this petition in the light of the fact that the petitioner Bank appears to
1 of 3
varsha P-5-IA-7627-2026.doc
be misinterpreting the order of this court.
4. As per the order dated 28th September 2026, this court directed
the applicant to pay the amount of Rs. 50,42,273/- to the petitioner
Bank on or before 3rd October 2026.
5. It is further recorded that in the event the applicant fails to do so,
the physical possession of the subject property would be taken today,
i.e. 5th October 2026, at 5:00 PM with appropriate police assistance
being provided to the petitioner Bank.
6. The learned counsel for the applicant has annexed to the
praecipe, a copy of an email address to the petitioner Bank, clearly
stating that amount of Rs. 50,43,000/- was remitted in the account of
the Bank on 3rd October 2026, by way of RTGS.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner Bank has joined the
proceedings through video conferencing, and on instructions, she
confirms the fact that the said amount has been received in the
account of the petitioner Bank. A proper reading of the order dated
28th September 2026, particularly paragraph 14 to 16 thereof, makes
it abundantly clear that it was only if the applicant had failed to pay
the said amount to the bank that the exercise of physical possession
was to be taken today at 5:00 PM.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Bank submits
that she has written instructions to state that in the light of the defaults
of the applicant in the past, the petitioner Bank is insisting on taking
physical possession of the subject property today at 5:00 PM.
2 of 3
varsha P-5-IA-7627-2026.doc
9. We are of the opinion that the effect of our order dated 28th
September 2026 is very clear, and in the light of compliance shown by
the applicant by ensuring payment of the said amount in the account
of the petitioner Bank on 3rd October 2026, the exercise of physical
possession ought not to be undertaken today.
10. A proper reading of the said order would have led to the police
authorities not being troubled for taking the physical possession of the
property today at 5:00 PM, and the applicant would not have been
constrained to mention this proceeding at 3:00 PM today.
11. We make it clear that the exercise of taking physical possession
stands deferred.
12. The petition will be taken up for further consideration tomorrow
as per schedule.
(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.)
3 of 3
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.