AU SMALL FINANCE BANK LTD. Vs. JASRAM MANPHOOLRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Bank and it had granted loan to the respondent No.1. Since the loan amount was not repaid by the respondent No.1, therefore, he was declared as NPA and the proceedings under Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short 'the Act of 2002') were initiated by the petitioner- Bank under the Act of 2002, possession of the mortgaged property was taken over by the petitioner- Bank with the aid of police on 21/1/2025.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No.1 after the possession of the mortgaged property being taken over by the petitioner- Bank, forcibly entered the mortgaged property by breaking in. It was submitted that act and inaction of the respondent No.1 is nothing but tantamount to be an assault on the rule of law. He submits that in the circumstances, the petitioner- Bank approached the Superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh and SHO, Pilibanga for restoring the possession of the mortgaged property but till date, no action has been taken by them.