OMKARRAM MADANLAL JANGID AND ANOTHERversusCHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE PVT LTD AND ANOTHER

2026:BHC-AUG:37625


                                                  1                       1.odt


                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              WRIT PETITION NO. 10711 OF 2026
                      OMKARRAM MADANLAL JANGID AND ANOTHER
                                            VERSUS
                   CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE PVT LTD
                                       AND ANOTHER
                                                ...
                        Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Rakhunde Pravin B.
                                                …

                                       CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
                                       DATE : 20th AUGUST, 2026


              PER COURT :

              1.          The Petitioners who are borrowers, are seeking extension of

              time for complying the order which is passed by the Presiding Officer,

              Debt Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad.

              2.          It is the contention of Petitioner that in the proceedings

              which are pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad, in

              S.A. no. 176/2025 an Interlocutory Application was moved by the

              Petitioner for staying the possession of secured assets on 20.08.2026.

              After hearing the submissions of the parties, the Presiding Officer has

              passed an order directing to defer the possession of secured assets which

              was fixed to be taken on 20.08.2026, in case the Applicants / borrowers

              deposits Rs. 4 Lakhs by 20.08.2026, before 12 noon, failing to which the
                                     2                        1.odt


Respondents are at liberty to take the possession of secured assets.

3.           It is the contention of the Petitioners that they have

borrowed a loan from Respondent no. 1 / Cholamandalam Investment

and Finance Private Limited, to the extent of Rs. 18,40,000/-. The

Petitioners have paid monthly installment to the Bank regularly.

However, due to Covid 19, they could not pay installments and the loan

account of the Petitioners is declared NPA on 21.04.2026. As a result,

Respondent no. 1 has filed Application under Section 14 of the

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of

Security Interest Act, (for short ‘the SARFAESI Act’), before the Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Jalna.

4.           It is submitted that without issuing notice, the Application

filed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, has been allowed by

appointing one Advocate Mr. Pradip Mundhe, as a Court Commissioner

to take possession of the secured assets by order dated 24.07.2026.

Learned Advocate further submits that Court Commissioner has issued

notice on 28.07.2026, to the Petitioners intimating therein that the Court

Commissioner will take possession of the secured assets on 20.08.2026,

at about 11:00 a.m. Aggrieved by the said order, the Petitioners have

challenged the possession notice before the Debt Recovery Tribunal,

Aurangabad, by filing Interlocutory Application. The said Interlocutory
                                      3                       1.odt


Application was listed on 19.08.2026, before the Tribunal and after

hearing the parties the aforesaid order came to be passed directing the

Petitioners to deposit an amount of Rs. 4 Lakhs within less than 24 hours,

failing which, the Respondents were at liberty to take possession.

5.           It is the contention of the Petitioners that an amount of Rs.

5,90,000/- is the amount due which is to be recovered, for which the

directions are given to deposit Rs. 4 Lakhs, within less than period of 24

hours, which is not sufficient since the present Petitioners have a small

business and it would take some time to make arrangement for depositing

the said amount. Therefore, it is requested that the order passed by the

Debt Recovery Tribunal, needs to be modified to the extent of extending

the time for depositing the amount.

6.           Since it is obvious from the said order that the matter was

heard on 19.08.2026 and the amount was directed to be deposited before

the 12 noon on the next date, the time granted was obviously not

sufficient for a common man to deposit an amount of Rs. 4 Lakhs at a

such short notice.

7.           Hence in my view, it would be appropriate to extend the

time as granted by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, for a further period of ten

days, since no prejudice would be cause to Respondents merely by

extending the time.
                                     4                        1.odt


8.           In my view, it is not necessary to issue notice to the

Respondents, as such, the Writ Petition is disposed of by extending the

time to deposit the amount as directed the Debt Recovery Tribunal,

within a period of ten days i.e. till 30.08.2026, failing which, the

Respondents shall be at liberty to take further steps as directed by the

Debt Recovery Tribunal, in its order dated 19.08.2026.

9.           Since this order is passed without touching the merits of the

matter no notice is issued to the Respondents. On failure of Petitioners to

deposit amount within then days, the order passed by Debt Recovery

Tribunal, shall automatically come into operation.




                                     ( MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. )




SPC