SMFG INDIA HOME FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED AUHORIZED OFFICER NIKUNJ DONGA vs VIJAY PRATAP — 2722/2025
Case under Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 Section 14,. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 07th March 2026.
CRMA J - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - JMFC
CNR: GJSR120078762025
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
2722/2025
Filing Date
23-12-2025
Registration No
2722/2025
Registration Date
23-12-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, KATHOR
Judge
3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
07th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SMFG INDIA HOME FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED AUHORIZED OFFICER NIKUNJ DONGA
Adv. C K GANGANI
Respondent(s)
VIJAY PRATAP
ANJU BHARTIY
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
FINAL HEARING
FINAL HEARING
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 02-03-2026 | FINAL HEARING | |
| 28-01-2026 | FINAL HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kathor (Surat) allowed SMFG India Home Finance Company's application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to take possession of a mortgaged residential property (Flat No. 403, Shivam Residency, Kadodara) from defaulting borrowers Vijay Pratap and Anju Bhartiy. The court found the finance company satisfied all statutory requirements including proper notice under Section 13(2), classification of the account as non-performing asset, and consideration of borrower objections, thereby authorizing a court commissioner to take possession of the secured asset within 90 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kathor (Surat) allowed SMFG India Home Finance Company's application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to take possession of a mortgaged residential property (Flat No. 403, Shivam Residency, Kadodara) from defaulting borrowers Vijay Pratap and Anju Bhartiy. The court found the finance company satisfied all statutory requirements including proper notice under Section 13(2), classification of the account as non-performing asset, and consideration of borrower objections, thereby authorizing a court commissioner to take possession of the secured asset within 90 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts