Orissa High Court
WP(C)/21510/2026 of SABITRI DEVI CHARITABLE TRUST, JAJPUR Vs BANKING OMBUDSMAN, RBI, SACHIVALAYA MARG, BHUBANESWAR on 23 July 2026
of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 21510 OF 2026 Sabitri Devi, Charitable Trust, Jajpur …. Petitioner Mr. Alok Kumar Panda, Advocate -versus- Banking Ombudsman, RBI, Bhubaneswar and others …. Opp. Parties CORAM: JUSTICE KRUSHNA RAM MOHAPATRA JUSTICE MRUGANKA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 21510 OF 2026
Sabitri Devi, Charitable Trust, Jajpur
….
Petitioner
Mr. Alok Kumar Panda, Advocate
-versus-
Banking Ombudsman, RBI,
Bhubaneswar and others
….
Opp. Parties
CORAM:
JUSTICE KRUSHNA RAM MOHAPATRA
JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Order No. 23.07.2026
1.
1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. The Petitioner in this writ petition prays for the following relief:
“It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to admit the writ petition, issue notice to the Opp. Parties/finance company and after hearing direct the Opp. Parties to restore possession of the mortgaged properties to the petitioner’s institution forthwith on payment of the defaulted EMI together with penal interest and other lawful charges for the greater interest of justice;
Further prays to pass any other order/orders, direction/directions as deemed fit and proper;
And for this act of kindness the petitioner shall as in duty bound ever pray;”
3. Mr. Panda, learned counsel submits that the Petitioner had earlier approached this Court in W.P.(C) No.13040 of 2026 assailing the action taken by the Financer, namely, the Authorized Officer, Varthana Finance Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar-Opposite Party No.2 under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and
Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. This Court disposed of the said writ petition on 6th May, 2026 with the following direction:
“3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, we are of the considered opinion that justice of the case would be met by granting some relief to the Petitioner of course subject to certain conditions so that the interest of the Bank is also protected.
In the above circumstances, we dispose off this Petition with the following directions/conditions:
i. Petitioner shall discharge all the outstanding installmental obligations within an outer limit of six weeks;
ii. Petitioner shall pay the first installment of Rs.12,00,000/- (Rupees Twelve Lakh only) within two weeks from this day;
iii. Petitioner shall pay the second installment of similar amount within two weeks thereafter;
iv. Petitioner shall remit the remaining amount of Rs.11,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh only) within two more weeks next following; and
v. If the Petitioner fails to remit any of the installments within the period prescribed, as above, it is open to the Bank to take physical possession of the subject property with the aid of the police. The jurisdictional police is directed to provide police aid to the OP-Bank for implementing Section 14 of order, on production of a copy of this order forthwith without saying anything as to they not being the party to this proceeding.
Non-compliance of this order will be viewed very seriously and an adverse entry may be made in the Service Register of concerned Police Officer. Now, no costs.
Web copy of order to be acted upon by all concerned.”
4. It is submitted by Mr. Panda, learned counsel that the Petitioner could not comply with the direction of this Court by depositing Rs.12,00,000/- towards first installment within the stipulated time. Consequently, possession of the secured assets has already been taken over on 22nd June, 2026.
5. Mr. Panda, learned counsel for the Petitioner, however, submits that the Petitioner is ready and willing to negotiate with the Financer and deposit the overdue amount for restoration of possession of the secured assets. He, therefore, prays for withdrawal of the writ petition to avail the appropriate remedy.
5.1. A memo in support of the aforesaid submission is also filed in Court, which is taken on record.
6. In view of the memo filed, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn with an observation that the Petitioner, if so advised, may negotiate with the Financer, namely, the Authorized Officer, Varthana Finance Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar-Opposite Party No.2 for settlement of the overdue dues and restoration of possession of the secured assets.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge
(Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) ms
Judge