JUDGMENT :

P. SAM KOSHY, J.

1. The instant writ petition has been filed seeking for the following reliefs:

(A) A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of appropriate nature do issue commanding and directing the respondents to produce before this Hon’ble Court all the relevant records pertaining to the case of the petitioners for its kind perusal.

(B) A writ and/or an order in the nature of the writ of appropriate nature do quashing the e-auction notice dated 15.10.2022 published in Hari Bhumi city edition and Central Chronical (CG) edition (ANP-1 colly) at serial no. 1 which relates to the property of the petitioner.

(C) A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of appropriate nature do issue directing the respondent no. Sub Divisional Officer to decide the appeal itself No. 20210111000421/A-6-year 2020-21 between Smt. Sanyogita Sharma vs. M/s Travelwala India Pvt. Ltd. and Others within the period prescribed and till then the auction proceed settled to be held on 24.11.2022 (as per Annexure P-1) be kept in abeyance in facts and circumstance of case.

2. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the document Annexure P-1 which is a paper publication showing notice of sale of immovable properties attached with the respondent no. 3/bank by the private respondents. The notice for sale of the immovable properties has been published by the respondent no. 3 Bank under the provisions of SARFAESI Act, 2002 read with proviso to Rule 6(2) and 8(6) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules 2002.

3. The challenge to the said notice of sale is primarily on the ground that the petitioner herein is the owner of the mortgaged property and that she is totally unassociated with the entire transaction carried out by the private respondents with the respondent no. 3 bank.

4. It is the contention of learned counsel for petitioner that the petitioner had come in physical possession of the said property by virtue of a Will that was executed by her father Shri Jagmohan Sharma. It was the further contention of petitioner that the entire transaction made by the private respondents with the respondent no. 3 Bank is without taking the petitioner in confidence nor was she aware of any such transaction at any point of time. That it is only when the impugned notice of sale has been published in the newspaper on 15th October, 2022, she has learnt about the said transactions. Therefore, she has approached this Court for an appropriate direction protecting her interest.

5. It is the contention of petitioner that in spite of there being a specific Will in her favour the private respondents who are her own family members have fraudulently got the property mutated in their name vide order dated 01.05.2015. This fact when it came to the notice of petitioner, she preferred an appeal before the office of the Sub Divisional Officer, Raipur where the case has been registered as Revenue Appeal No. 20210111000421/A-6/year 2020-21 between Smt. Sanyogita Sharma vs. M/s Travelwala India Pvt. Ltd. and Others.

6. It is further contended by learned counsel for petitioner that there the petitioner has also an order of status quo in her favour in respect of subject land. That in spite of the said specific order of status quo by the SDO, the respondent no. 3 Bank has proceeded for sale of the said properties by auction for which the impugned notice has been published for holding the auction on 24.11.2022 at 2 p.m. i.e. (today afternoon). The prayer of the petitioner is that pending the appeal before the SDO, the auction proceedings may be directed to be deferred and if required, the auction be initiated only after the outcome of the Revenue Appeal pending before the SDO and an interim protection to that effect may be passed while disposing of the writ petition.

7. At the outset, this Court is of the opinion that under the given factual circumstances of the case, where admittedly the auction sale has been initiated invoking the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 read with