EQUITAS SMALL FINANCE BANK vs PARMAR VIJAYBHAI — 5/2026
Case under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 Section 14. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC
CNR: GJKH110000352026
Filing Number
5/2026
Filing Date
21-Jan-2026
Registration No
5/2026
Registration Date
21-Jan-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, KHEDA
Judge
3-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
Decision Date
16-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED
Last updated 11-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.EQUITAS SMALL FINANCE BANK
Adv. P P OZA
Respondent(s)
-
1.PARMAR VIJAYBHAI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
16-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: Equitas Small Finance Bank v. Parmar Vijaybhai (5/2026) The court granted Equitas Small Finance Bank's application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to take possession of a mortgaged property after the borrower defaulted on a ₹1,50,000 secured loan. The court found the bank had satisfied all statutory requirements, including issuing a 60-day demand notice for the outstanding amount of ₹1,40,119 and classifying the account as a non-performing asset. A Court Commissioner was authorized to take possession of the 600 sq. ft. residential property in Kheda district and forward it to the bank, with the borrower bearing all associated costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
07-Mar-2026
Order/Judgement
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
28-Feb-2026
Process To Opponent
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
11-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
21-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 5/2026
Case Summary: Equitas Small Finance Bank v. Parmar Vijaybhai (5/2026) The court granted Equitas Small Finance Bank's application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to take possession of a mortgaged property after the borrower defaulted on a ₹1,50,000 secured loan. The court found the bank had satisfied all statutory requirements, including issuing a 60-day demand notice for the outstanding amount of ₹1,40,119 and classifying the account as a non-performing asset. A Court Commissioner was authorized to take possession of the 600 sq. ft. residential property in Kheda district and forward it to the bank, with the borrower bearing all associated costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts