IDFC FIRST BANK LTD vs PARMAR MAHESHBHAI JASHBHAI — 109/2026

Case under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 Section 14. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 18th April 2026.

Case disposed

CRMA J - CRIMI MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC

CNR: GJKH020007542026

Filing Number

109/2026

Filing Date

17-Feb-2026

Registration No

109/2026

Registration Date

17-Feb-2026

Court

CIVIL COURT NADIAD

Judge

2-Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

Decision Date

18-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED

Last updated 23-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 Section 14

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.IDFC FIRST BANK LTD

    Adv. S K BHATT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PARMAR MAHESHBHAI JASHBHAI

  2. 2.PARMAR BABITABEN JASHABAI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Apr-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court allowed IDFC First Bank's application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to take possession of a residential property (1200 sq. ft. at Nadiad, Kheda district) after the borrowers defaulted on their loan and failed to pay within 60 days of the demand notice. The court appointed a commissioner to take symbolic possession with a Panchnama, empowering him to break open locks if necessary, and directed the bank to deposit ₹15,000 as remuneration within 30 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 17-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 109/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed IDFC First Bank's application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to take possession of a residential property (1200 sq. ft. at Nadiad, Kheda district) after the borrowers defaulted on their loan and failed to pay within 60 days of the demand notice. The court appointed a commissioner to take symbolic possession with a Panchnama, empowering him to break open locks if necessary, and directed the bank to deposit ₹15,000 as remuneration within 30 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case