Authority: Supreme Court of India

Order Date: 05-08-2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioners: Ashok Rajkumar Gupta & Ors (SLP Nos.22378‑22379/2026).
  • Respondents: Surday Small Finance Bank Limited & Ors.
  • The petitions challenge the correctness of High Court of Judicature at Bombay judgments dated 12‑02‑2026 and 12‑03‑2026 in WP No.2078/2026.
  • In the High Court proceedings, Respondent No.1 (the bank) was a writ petitioner challenging a DRT order dated 04‑02‑2026 that allowed the petitioners’ application for restoration of possession of a suit property.
  • The High Court had stayed the DRT order pending final disposal of the writ petition and, on 24‑06‑2026, directed that the status‑quo as of that date regarding possession be maintained.
  • On 28‑01‑2026, the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Pune, in IA No.250/2026 (SA No.61/1026) directed that, because a petition under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was pending before the NCLT, the respondent bank could not take possession of the suit property.
  • The bank allegedly took possession between 03:25 PM and 04:10 PM on 28‑01‑2026 despite the pending IA and the injunction order.
  • IA No.335/2026 (SA No.61/2026) filed by the petitioners sought restoration of possession; the DRT disposed of it on 04‑02‑2026, ordering the bank to restore possession within a week, de‑seal the property, and for the applicants to settle the loan account.
  • Respondent No.1 filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the DRT order of 04‑02‑2026.

Final Outcome

  • The Supreme Court held that, pending disposal of the writ petition before the High Court, the DRT order dated 04‑02‑2026 shall operate.
  • Respondent’s counsel, Mr. Archit Virmani, undertook to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the property to the petitioners on or before 12‑08‑2026, without creating any third‑party rights.
  • The petitioners will retain possession until the High Court proceedings are finally decided; if the final decision favours the respondent, they will return possession.
  • The writ petition shall be heard uninfluenced by the observations in the impugned orders or the present Supreme Court order.
  • All contentions between the parties remain open.
  • The Special Leave Petitions are disposed of in the terms stated, and any pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.

Topics: Possession Restoration, Insolvency Proceedings, Banking Dispute