JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Subhash G. Barot for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr.Rajesh P. Vyas for respondent No.1-Bank.

2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr. Vyas waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent No.1.

3.By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed to direct the respondent-Bank to quash and set aside the communication dated 30.09.2020 whereby the respondent No.1-Bank has forfeited the amount deposited by the petitioner being 25% of the bid amount for purchase of the property in auction situated at Block No. 549, Plot No. 21 admeasuring 764 sq.yards i.e. 638.8 sq.mtrs in Shrinathji Industrial Estate situated at Bakrol Bujrang Sim, Bakrol Bunjrang Road, Dhamtavan Road, Taluka; Dascroi, Dist. Ahmedabad.

4.The petitioner has further prayed to direct respondent No.1-Bank to disburse the sanctioned loan of Rs. 69,96,000/- and to credit the same against remaining 75% of the quoted bid amount and to handover the peaceful possession of the property.

5.Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner made an offer pursuant to the e-auction notice issued by the respondent No.1-Bank on 23.01.2020 in Sandesh News Daily for auction of the aforesaid property which was mortgaged by the original borrower with the respondent No.1-Bank.

6.Respondent No.1-Bank issued e-auction notice with respect to the mortgaged property owned by one Krishnakumar Talsaji Purohit, who stood as guarantor of the borrower M/s. Heer Metal Corporation. The respondent No.1-Bank has initiated the proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 [‘SARFAESI Act’ for short] for recovering its outstanding dues against the financial assistance provided to M/s. Heer Metal Corporation.

7.The petitioner deposited Rs. 8 lakh as earnest money deposit being 10% of the reserved price fixed by the respondent No.1 being Rs. 79,36,000/-.

8.The petitioner was declared the successful bidder for mortgaged property for consideration of Rs. 93,46,000/- being highest bidder. Respondent No.1-Bank by letter dated 04.03.2020 informed the petitioner about his bid being accepted and further informed that the mortgaged property will be transferred in the name of the petitioner and the possession would be handed over on deposit of 25% of the amount by the petitioner within 15 days and the remaining amount within 15 days thereafter. The petitioner accordingly deposited the amount of Rs. 15,50,000/- on 28.02.2020 together with earnest money total being Rs. 23,50,000/- and respondent No.1-Bank thereafter was pleased to grant 15 days time to deposit the remaining amount of Rs. 69,96,000/-.

9.The petitioner thereafter made a request to respondent No.1-Bank to extend the time for making payment of the remaining amount of Rs. 69,96,000/- which was granted by the respondent No.1-Bank from 03.03.2020 upto 11.5.2020 vide communication dated 12.03.2020.

10. It is the case of the petitioner that from 24.03.2020 there was a national vide lock down due to Covid-19 Pandemic situation and therefore, the petitioner further requested to grant the time of additional three months on 02.05.2020 as per the RBI guidelines and circulars issued for granting 90 days further time to deposit the outstanding amount by the successful bidder in view of the Covid-19 Pandemic situation.

11. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner came to know that the respondent No.2-original owner-M/s. Heer Metal Corporation has illegally transferred property in question in favour of one Prabharam Bhagaram on 01.01.2019 and thereafter, the said property was transferred in favour of one Dineshbhai Nathabhai Desai on 20.02.2019. It is therefore, stated in the petition that the petitioner came to know that Dineshbhai Nathabhai Desai is in illegal possession of the property and it would be difficult for the bank to obtain the property from the third party and to hand over t