BANK OF INDIA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPC/2263/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 07th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010181252026

Filing Number

WPC/10449/2026

Filing Date

02-May-2026

Registration No

WPC/2263/2026

Registration Date

04-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL MATTERS ( 17 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS AND MIXED BAG ONES.. ( 1750 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

07-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BANK OF INDIA

    Adv. SAKET PANDEY,SURYAKANT YADAV,SURYAKANT YADAV, ,ISHAN SHARMA,VIVEK KUMAR YADAV,MANOJ KUMAR YADAV

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.District Magistrate- Cum- Collector

  3. 3.Tehsildar Champa

  4. 4.M/s Fortune Automotives

  5. 5.Hanuman Prasad Sharma

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

    Case Summary: Bank of India v. State of Chhattisgarh (WPC 2263/2026) The Chhattisgarh High Court directed the Tahsildar of Champa to decide Bank of India's pending representation and implement a District Magistrate's Section 14 order (under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets Act, 2002) for possession of mortgaged property within 45 days. The bank sought to enforce security interest after borrowers defaulted on their loan, which was classified as a Non-Performing Asset. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

  4. 02-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPC/2263/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Bank of India v. State of Chhattisgarh (WPC 2263/2026) The Chhattisgarh High Court directed the Tahsildar of Champa to decide Bank of India's pending representation and implement a District Magistrate's Section 14 order (under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets Act, 2002) for possession of mortgaged property within 45 days. The bank sought to enforce security interest after borrowers defaulted on their loan, which was classified as a Non-Performing Asset. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case