Bombay High Court
MOTILAL OSWAL HOME FINANCE LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA DISTRICT MAGISTARATE PUNE AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petition is disposed of as the directions for possession have been complied with and the respondents failed to appear.
Summary
Motilal Oswal Home Finance Limited filed a writ petition against the State of Maharashtra and others seeking enforcement of directions for physical possession of a secured asset. The Court noted that Respondents 4 and 5 failed to appear on the scheduled date despite being directed to do so. However, the Court observed that the directions for handing over possession to the petitioner had been complied with. Given the compliance and the respondents' non‑appearance, the Court held there was no further ground to continue the petition. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of, and any pending applications were also dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition should be disposed of on account of compliance with the court's possession directions and the respondents' failure to appear
Subjects
- writ petition
- secured creditor
- possession
- non‑appearance
- disposal
Judgment
919-WP-14471-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 14471 OF 2025
Motilal Oswal Home Finance Limited … Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra and others … Respondents
******
Mr. Navin Arora, for Petitioner.
Mr. B.V. Samant, Addl. G.P., a/w Ms. M.S. Bane, AGP for Respondents/State.
SWEETY
RAJU
BHALERAO
******
Digitally signed
by SWEETY
CORAM : MANISH PITALE &
RAJU
BHALERAO
Date:
2026.09.30
SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.
18:58:38 +0530
DATE : 30th SEPTEMBER 2026.
PC:
1. We have considered the record in this petition and also the orders
passed on 07/09/2026 and 10/09/2026.
2. We find that on 07/09/2026, Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were present
in Court and they were directed to remain present on the next date also.
3. It appears that they have not remained present on the next date of
listing and even today.
4. But, we find that the directions issued by this Court for handing over
physical possession of the secured asset to the petitioner (secured creditor)
have been complied with and the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 had indeed
remained present in this Court on 07/09/2026.
Bhalerao 1
919-WP-14471-2025.doc
5. In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the petition can
be disposed of.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if
any, also stand disposed of.
(SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.)
Bhalerao 2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.