Authority: High Court of Judicature at Patna

Order Date: 06-07-2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioner: Anita Devi, wife of the late Sonalal Prasad, resident of Ward No. 15, Dudhahi, PS‑Harsidhi, District‑East Champaran.
  • Respondents: The State of Bihar (through the District Magistrate‑cum‑Collector, East Champaran) and several district officials, plus Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited (through its authorized officer and branch manager) and the S.H.O. of Govindganj.
  • Nature of Proceeding: Civil writ petition (Case No. 3963 of 2026) seeking a writ of mandamus to restrain the respondents from proceeding with possession of the petitioner’s property following a memo dated 28.02.2026 (Memo No. 947) issued by the District Magistrate, East Champaran.
  • Reliefs Sought:

1. Issuance of a mandamus restraining the respondents from taking possession of the property described in Para‑5 of the petition, noting the petitioner is ready to settle the loan of Respondent 9.

2. Direction that respondents not take possession of any property other than that mortgaged against loan account No. LAP4MTH000088858, as the dwelling house is not mortgaged.

3. Restraining the respondents from proceeding under the Secularization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

  • Counsel Submissions:

Petitioner’s counsel argued that the petitioner should be permitted to make a one‑time settlement representation to the finance company, offering to pay approximately Rs 32,15,233 as of 17.03.2026 in equal installments.

Respondent‑Cholamandalam’s counsel stated that any representation would be considered per law, but only the mortgaged land could be auctioned; the petition’s prayer to restrain possession of the non‑mortgaged dwelling could not be entertained.

Final Outcome

  • The Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to make a suitable representation to Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited within four weeks from the date of the order.
  • The respondent‑finance company is directed to consider the representation on its merits and to give a decision preferably within four weeks of receipt of the representation.
  • No mandamus was issued to restrain possession of the mortgaged land; the Court affirmed that only mortgaged property may be auctioned.
  • With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed.

Topics: Legal Relief, Loan Settlement