The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Recovery Officer should not proceed with the execution of the recovery certificate after a stay has been granted by a superior court, and the sale of a property is vitiated if conducted without disclosing the reserve price in the proclamation and accepting a bid without a fresh advertisement for sale.

JUDGMENT

M. S. Karnik, J. - The challenge in this proceeding under article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the judgment and order dated 27/6/2011 of the Debts Recovery appellate Tribunal at Mumbai (hereafter 'DRaT' for short). Before the DRaT the order dated 26/3/2008 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Pune (hereafter 'DRT' for short) was under challenge, whereby the appeal No. 28 of 2006 filed by Respondent No.1 under Section 30 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions act, 1993 (hereafter 'RDDB & FI act' for short) was dismissed as being barred by time and as being beyond the scope of Section 30 of the RDDB & FI act.

2. The facts of the case in brief are: -

The Respondent No.2-Bank of India (hereafter 'BOI' for short) filed Civil Suit No.180 of 1992 before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune against the Respondent No.1-M/s. alpha Organic (hereafter 'alpha Organic' for short) for 2000' for short) became effective from 17/1/2000. alpha Organic filed First appeal No. 326 of 2001 before this Court against the judgment and decree dated 27/9/2000. The appeal is admitted and pending final hearing. This Court by an order dated 11/10/2002 passed in Civil application ('C.a.' for short) No. 3222 of 2001 and C. a. No. 3223 of 2002 in F. a. No. 326 of 2001 stayed the impugned decree subject to the condition regarding payment of the amount by alpha Organic in the manner stated in the order. By an order dated 18/6/2003, this Court allowed the C.a. No. 1886 of 2003 in F. a. No. 326 of 2001 filed on behalf of BOI for withdrawal of the amount deposited, by passing following order:

'So far as deposit of Rs.1,50,000/- made by the Respondent herein under order of this Court dated 11/10/2002 is concerned, the applicant bank is allowed to withdraw this amount subject to furnishing an undertaking to this Court that in the event respondent succeeds, the applicant bank shall bring back the said amount with interest as may be ordered by this Court at the time of final hearing.'

3. In the meantime, the recovery proceedings (for execution of decree dated 27/9/2000) came to be initiated by BOI before the DRT-II invoking the provisions of Section 31a of the RDDB & FI act. The Presiding Officer, DRT, Pune issued the recovery certificate dated 28/12/2001 under sub-section 7 of Section 19 of RDDB & FI act of Rs.14,65,500/-, certifying that the mentioned sum of Rs.14,65,500/-together with further interest till realization of the amount aforesaid is due to BOI from alpha Organic. It is further stated in the certificate that the Recovery Officer shall realize the amount as per such certificate in the manner and mode prescribed under Sections 25 and 28 of the RDDB & FI act.

4. a show cause notice under Rule 73 of second Schedule of Income Tax act, 1961 read with Sections 28 and 29 of the RDDB & FI act was issued on 24/6/2002 as to why the proprietor of alpha Organic should not be committed to civil prison in execution of the said certificate. alpha Organic filed an application before the Recovery Officer on 12/9/2003 informing him about the stay granted by the High Court to the decree and requested the Recovery Officer to stay the proceedings. The said application was rejected. In course of recovery proceedings, the Recovery Officer invited offers in sealed envelope of interested parties for auction sale on 'as is where basis'. The property for sale is described as 'all the piece and parcel of the property bearing Flat no.a-14, Vijay Laxmi Society, Paud Road, Pune 411 038 (hereafter 'the said flat' for short). The last date for receiving the bids was 29/12/2003 till 2.30 p.m. The public notice stipulated that the tenders received after the prescribed date and time will not be accepted. This public notice was published in the daily newspaper 'Prabhat' circulated in Pune.

5. By its order dated 23/4/2004, the Recovery Officer declared that in the public auction held on 23/4/2004, the Petitioner-Shri Sarang avinash Kamtekar (hereafter