JUDGMENT :

Avinash G. Gharote, J.

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2. The present petition raises a challenge to the action on the part of respondent no.1/ District Industries Centre in refusing to transfer the property in its record, in favour of the petitioner, unless the liability of the respondent no.2/Sales Tax Department, claiming earlier dues against M/s. Wood Stock Holdings, a Company which was owning the immovable property, attached and auctioned by the respondent no.3/Bank, under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, “the SARFAESI Act” hereinafter) is made by the petitioner, who is the auction purchaser. Further relief is claimed against the respondent no.3/Bank to issue No Objection Certificate (NOC) and issuance of a fresh sale certificate, free from all encumbrances in favour of the petitioner.

3. The factual matrix of the matter and contentions of the petitioner, are as under:-

(A) M/s. Wood Stock Holdings the owner of plot no.206, MIDC, Butibori, Pohi, Tah. Hingna, Distt. Nagpur along with the factory building constructed thereupon having a total built up area of 908.988 sq. meters had availed loan from the respondent no.3, on account of non-payment of which action under the SARFAESI Act was initiated by the respondent no.3/Bank, resulting in attachment of the above immovable property, which was put to auction.

(B) On 14/3/2017, the petitioner being the highest bidder to the tune of Rs.71,25,000/-, his offer was accepted.

(C) On 29/3/2017, the respondent no.3/Bank issued a sale certificate in favour of the petitioner. The symbolic possession of the above said immovable property was also handed over to the petitioner on 29/3/2017 by the respondent no.3/Bank.

(D) On 12/1/2018, the petitioner applied to the respondent no.1/District Industries Center (DIC) for issuance of NOC to get the said property transferred in its name.

(E) On 6/2/2018 the DIC/respondent no.1 informed the petitioner that for the purpose of transfer of the said immovable property, in its record, it will have to take NOC from the respondent no.2/Sales Tax Department as there were arrears of sales tax dues upon M/s. Wood Stock Holdings and also certain other documents, as listed in the communication dated 6/2/2018, were also directed to be submitted.

(F) A communication dated 3/3/2015, is also placed on record by the petitioner, which is addressed by the respondent no.2/Sales Tax Department to the respondent no.1/DIC stating that M/s Wood Stock Holdings was in arrears of sales tax dues for the period from 1/4/2010 to 31/3/2011 for Rs.7,17,130/- which was not recovered and since it was learnt that the dealer was in process of disposal of the plot at MIDC, the respondent no.1/DIC was requested to obtain NOC from the Sales Tax Department before approving the transfer of the business.

(G) It is contended that by operation of Section 26 -E of the SARFAESI Act, the property stood transferred to the petitioner free from encumbrances and any charge which may be claimed by the respondent no.2 on account of arrears of sales tax under Section 37 of the MAHARASHTRA VALUE ADDED TAX ACT , 2002 (for short, MVAT Act, 2002 hereinafter), would be subservient to the provisions of Section 26 -E of the SARFAESI Act, due to which the action on part of the respondent nos.1 and 2 of not issuing the NOC for transfer of the land in favour of the petitioner, on account of the so called dues claimed by the respondent no.2, was clearly not in consonance with law and therefore illegal.

(H) It is further contended that no notice whatsoever of any charge was given to the petitioner by the respondent nos.2 and 3 and therefore, the petitioner in absence thereof was not liable for payment of any dues of the respondent no.2 as the charge was not enforceable against the petitioner, who was an auction purchaser, without any notice of the charge.

(I) The provisions of the SARFAESI Act an