Kumar.R v. M/S.State Bank Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27-05-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN and WMP.No.21446 of 2026 Kumar.R ..Petitioner(s) Vs.

M/s.State Bank of India Centralised Retail Asset Management Centre (CRAMC), Annasalai, Chennai 600 002 Represented by its Authorised Officer, M/s. Umaa Gopal.

..Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondent from taking any coercive steps for a period of three months as requested by him in his representation dated 18.05.2026 submitted to the respondent pursuant to the order in Crl.M.P.No.158 of 2026 dated 21.04.2026 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur thereby enabling the Petitioner either to redeem the property or to arrange for the sale of the same through private treaty for correct/fair market value.

For Petitioner :

Mr.V.Chandrasekaran For Respondent :

Mr.Vaibhav R. Venkatesh

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by G.R.Swaminathan J.) The Writ Petition is filed to forbear the respondent from taking coercive action, pursuant to the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur, enabling the petitioner to redeem the property or to arrange for the sale of the same through private treaty for fair market value.

2. Heard both sides.

3. The writ petitioner, along with his wife, availed two housing loans from the respondent-Bank. They have committed default and their account became a non-performing asset. The respondent-Bank took action under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as 'SARFAESI Act'). The respondent-Bank also obtained possession order on 21.04.2026 under Section 14(1) of SARFAESI Act before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur.

4. At this stage, the writ petitioner/borrower has come before this Court. The writ petitioner has not challenged the possession order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. He only states that he may be given breathing time of three months, during which time he can liquidate his entire dues.

5. When the matter was listed last week, we had called upon the writ petitioner to file an undertaking affidavit. Today, the same has been filed and it reads as follows:

6. Recording the aforesaid undertaking affidavit, we direct the respondent-Bank not to take any coercive action against the writ petitioner exactly for a period of three (3) months from today. It would be open to the respondent-Bank to take further action in case of default by the writ petitioner, in terms of the undertaking affidavit. It is for the writ petitioner to identify a buyer and produce him before the respondent-Bank in the meanwhile.

7. The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

(G.R.S.,J.) (V.L.N.,J.) 27-05-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Sni/hvk

To M/s.Umaa Gopal, Authorised Officer, State Bank of India, Centralised Retail Asset Management Centre (CRAMC), Annasalai, Chennai - 600 002.

G.R.SWAMINATHAN J.

AND V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN J.

Sni/hvk 27-05-2026