JUDGMENT :

S.V. Gangapurwala, J.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties taken up for final hearing.

2. The petitioner is a purchaser of the movable and immovable assets of the respondent No.5/Karkhana in an auction proceedings at the behest of the respondent No. 6/bank under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (for short “Securitization Act”). The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are claiming the recovery of excise dues outstanding against the respondent No. 5/Karkhana from the petitioner. The petitioner assails the said action in the instant petition.

3. Mr. Suryawanshi, the learned advocate for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser in the auction conducted by the respondent No. 6/bank of movable and immovable assets of the respondent No. 5 under the Securitization Act. The dues of the secured bank shall have priority claim over the excise department. The learned counsel to buttress his submissions relies on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in a case of National Steel and Agro Industries Limited Mumbai Vs. State of Maharashtra and others repo