Mohammed Raees H. J. Khan v. Deutsche Bank Ag

bipin prithiani 4-wp-6664.26.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6664 OF 2026 Mohammed Raees H. J. Khan ...

Petitioner

Versus

Deutsche Bank A G ...

Respondent ****** None for the Petitioner.

None for Respondent.

BIPIN DHARMENDER PRITHIANI Date: 2026.06.12 10:08:07 +0530 BIPIN DHARMENDER PRITHIANI ****** CORAM : MANISH PITALE AND SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ.

DATE : 11th JUNE 2026 P.C. :

.

None for the petitioner, even on the second call. 2.

We find that by this petition, the petitioner is seeking to challenge an order passed by the Competent Magistrate under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Securitisation Act). The petitioner is a borrower and it appears that the grievance pertains to the petitioner not having been heard when the order was passed.

3.

It is settled law that the Competent Magistrate while exercising jurisdiction under Section 14 of the Securitisation Act, performs only a ministerial act and there is no question of granting hearing to the original borrower.

bipin prithiani 4-wp-6664.26.doc 3.

Besides, we find that the writ petition itself makes reference to a pending Securitisation Application bearing S.A. No.148 of 2021, which appears to have been filed by the petitioner, thereby demonstrating that the petitioner has already invoked the statutory remedy available to him.

4.

In view of the above, we find no reason to entertain the present petition and accordingly, it is dismissed. (SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.)