BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LTD AUTHORRISED OFFICER SHREE MEHUL JANI vs VAGHARI ROHITKUMAR JAYANTIBHAI — 39/2026
Case under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 Section 14. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 12th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION-JMFC
CNR: GJMH070001842026
Filing Number
39/2026
Filing Date
29-Jan-2026
Registration No
39/2026
Registration Date
29-Jan-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, VIJAPUR
Judge
1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
Decision Date
12-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED
Last updated 16-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LTD AUTHORRISED OFFICER SHREE MEHUL JANI
Adv. T C MODI
Respondent(s)
-
1.VAGHARI ROHITKUMAR JAYANTIBHAI
-
2.VAGHARI JAYABEN JAYANTIBHAI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
12-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Vijapur allowed Bajaj Housing Finance Ltd.'s application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act to take possession of a residential property mortgaged as security for a defaulted loan of Rs. 8,30,000. The court appointed a Court Commissioner to seize the property located in Govindpura, Mahesana district, within 90 days, holding that under SARFAESI law, the magistrate cannot adjudicate the merits of the claim but must assist the creditor in possession-taking after the borrowers failed to repay Rs. 6,55,820 within the statutory 60-day notice period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
12-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
09-Mar-2026
Final Hearing
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
24-Feb-2026
Final Hearing
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM
-
05-Feb-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
29-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 39/2026
Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Vijapur allowed Bajaj Housing Finance Ltd.'s application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act to take possession of a residential property mortgaged as security for a defaulted loan of Rs. 8,30,000. The court appointed a Court Commissioner to seize the property located in Govindpura, Mahesana district, within 90 days, holding that under SARFAESI law, the magistrate cannot adjudicate the merits of the claim but must assist the creditor in possession-taking after the borrowers failed to repay Rs. 6,55,820 within the statutory 60-day notice period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts