Bombay High Court
ICICI HOME FINANCE COMPANY LTD AND ANRversusKHADIJA ABDULHUSAIN KHEDWALA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court declined to interfere with the merits and disposed the petition by directing the filing of affidavits and ordering the DRT to hear both interim applications on 29 October 2026.
Summary
The petitioners, ICICI Home Finance Co. Ltd., a secured creditor, challenged a Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) order that imposed a status quo on a property pending a hearing on 29 October 2026. The petitioners argued that the order was premature, preventing them from taking possession and was based on false statements by the respondents. The respondents contended that the DRT order was proper, that the matter was listed for hearing, and that the petitioners could appeal to the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. The High Court observed that the matter was already scheduled before the DRT and declined to interfere with the merits, instead directing the parties to file affidavits and directing the DRT to hear both interim applications on the scheduled date. The Court disposed of the writ petition without making any substantive findings on the parties' claims.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court should stay or set aside the DRT's interim order of status quo pending the scheduled hearing.
- Whether the petitioners have an alternative remedy of appeal before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, rendering the writ petition inadmissible.
- What procedural directions are appropriate to ensure the pending interim applications are heard and disposed of by the DRT.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- writ petition
- status quo
- Debt Recovery Tribunal
- SARFAESI Act
- secured creditor
- interim application
- property possession
- procedural direction
Judgment
911-WP-13014-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 13014 OF 2026
ICICI Home Finance Company Limited and another … Petitioners
Versus
Khadija Abdulhusain Khedwala and others … Respondents
******
SWEETY
Mr. Nikhil Rajan, i/b V. Deshpande & Co., for Petitioners.
RAJU
BHALERAO
Mr. Kaustubh S. Pawar (through VC), a/w Mr. Shreyas P. Barsawade, for
Digitally
Respondent No. 1.
signed by
SWEETY RAJU
BHALERAO
Date:
2026.10.09
******
18:31:06
+0530
CORAM : MANISH PITALE &
SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.
DATE : 09th OCTOBER 2026.
PC:
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and contesting Respondent
No. 1.
2. This is a fresh petition listed for consideration today.
3. Petitioner No. 1 is a secured creditor, aggrieved by the impugned
order dated 10/09/2026 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Pune, (DRT).
By the said order, the DRT has directed the parties to maintain status quo in
respect of the subject property till the next date of listing, i.e. 29/10/2026.
4. The said order has been passed in Interim Application No. 3490 of
2026, filed by the contesting respondents in Securitisation Application No.
Bhalerao 1
911-WP-13014-2026.doc
764 of 2026, which has been filed in order to challenge steps taken by
Petitioner No. 1 under the provisions of the Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act,
2002 (SARFAESI Act).
5. The contesting respondents claim to be third party purchasers from
Respondent No. 4 - developer and the order of status quo has been granted
at their behest.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently submits that the
impugned order deserves to be set aside and in any case, it needs to be
stayed forthwith, for the reason that DRT has issued such a drastic order of
maintaining status quo at the time when the petitioner secured creditor was
about to take physical possession of the subject property, without any
discussion on the merits of the matter and without examining as to whether
the contesting respondents had made out a prima facie case in their favor. It
is further stated that the contesting respondents have made false statements
on affidavit with regard to refusal to accept notice on the part of the
petitioners. On this basis, it is submitted that this Court may grant interim
stay of the impugned order.
7. The learned counsel appearing for contesting Respondent No. 1
submits that the statements made in the affidavit placed before the DRT
Bhalerao 2
911-WP-13014-2026.doc
were correct and that since the proceedings are now listed before the DRT on
29/10/2026, there is no reason for passing any urgent orders in this writ
petition. It is further submitted that alternative remedy of filing appeal
before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) is available to the
petitioners and therefore, the writ petition may not be entertained.
8. We are of the opinion that since the proceedings are now listed before
the DRT on 29/10/2026, the writ petition can be disposed of by issuing
appropriate directions. Such directions would address the apprehension
expressed on behalf of the petitioners. This is necessitated in the light of
another fact brought to the notice of this Court by the petitioners to the
effect that, in the interregnum, the petitioners have already filed Interim
Application (Diary) No. 3750 of 2026 in the pending Securitisation
Application, seeking a direction to vacate the status quo.
9. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:
(a) The petitioners shall file reply affidavit in Interim
Application No. 3490 of 2026, filed by the contesting
respondents on or before 19th October 2026. Rejoinder
affidavit, if any, shall be filed by the contesting
respondents in the said application on or before
26/10/2026.
(b) The contesting respondents are directed to file their
reply affidavit in Interim Application (Diary) No. 3750 of
Bhalerao 3
911-WP-13014-2026.doc
2026, filed by the petitioners for vacating the order of
status quo. The said reply affidavit shall be filed on or
before 19th October 2026. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, on
behalf of the petitioners shall be filed on or before
26/10/2026.
(c) DRT Pune shall take up both the interim applications,
i.e. Interim Application No. 3490 of 2026 and Interim
Application (Diary) No. 3750 of 2026 for consideration
and hearing on 29/10/2026. The DRT is directed to take
up both the applications for hearing and disposal on the
said date. It is further specifically directed that both the
applications shall be disposed of by DRT Pune on the same
day, i.e. on 29/10/2026.
10. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Pending
applications, if any, stand disposed of.
11. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observations on the
merits of the matter or the allegations and counter-allegations made on
behalf of the parties.
12. All rights and contentions of the parties are kept open.
(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.)
Bhalerao 4
Checking your session…