Bombay High Court Orders Bank to Return Andheri East Flat to Wrongfully Evicted Family
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday ordered the Saraswat Co-operative Bank Ltd (SCBL) to restore possession of an Andheri East flat to a family that was wrongfully evicted due to a mortgage dispute between two banks. Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram Shirsat ruled that the family, who legally purchased the property in a 2017 bank auction, had been unnecessarily caught in the middle of a dispute over recovery dues.
The petitioners, Mariyam Rangwala and her family, were physically evicted from their home in August last year, leaving their belongings inside. The high court called the eviction a "bolt from the blue" and ordered SCBL to return possession of the flat to the family within four weeks.
The dispute stems from competing claims by SCBL and the State Bank of India (SBI) over the flat. The original owner, who purchased the flat in 1985, had used the same property to secure loans from both banks.
In 2004, the previous owner's firm mortgaged the flat to the SBI for credit facilities worth Rs 3.23 crore. This security interest was registered with the Central Registry of Securitisation Asset Reconstruction and Security Interest of India (CERSAI) in March 2012. Later in 2012, the owner deposited the same title deeds with SCBL to avail a Rs 25 lakh overdraft facility.
While SCBL declared the loan a non-performing asset in 2013 and took symbolic possession of the flat, it took no further action for 12 years. In contrast, the SBI acted quickly, issuing a notice in May 2013 and holding an e-auction in April 2017.
The Rangwala family purchased the flat during the SBI auction in August 2017 for Rs 66.45 lakh and held a registered sale certificate. They had been in valid possession for over eight years before their eviction.
In 2025, SCBL filed an application before a magistrate to act on its 12-year-old symbolic possession. On August 20, 2025, a court commissioner physically evicted the Rangwala family.
The High Court criticized SCBL for its "deep slumber" and ruled that once SBI enforced its security interest, the flat was no longer available for enforcement by SCBL. The court added that SCBL could pursue its claims against SBI directly without harming the Rangwalas.
