Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, RAKESH KAINTHLA
Satyam Prasad Bhandar – Appellant
Versus
Deputy General Manager of Baroda – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present petition has been filed for seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the e-auction notice dated 5.8.2024 along with any consequential proceedings conducted in furtherance of the notice; writ of mandamus, directing the respondent-Bank to refund the money received from any of the successful auction bidder/purchaser; to release the outstanding dues from the inventory/stock videographed, photographed andverified at the time of the seizure of the mortgaged property; directing the respondent Bank to return high-value inventory/ stock, which was videographed/photographed at the time of sealing of the mortgaged premises by the Bank; to revive the One Time Settlement (OTS) proposal as per the terms and conditions proposed in the year 2022; produce all the relevant records; and provide an opportunity to clear all the outstanding dues.
2. As per the petitioner, the petitioner is a sole proprietorship firm. The property measuring 0-05-99 hectares, located at Mohal Nari, Sub Tehsil Bharwain, District Una, H.P., is owned by petitioner No. 2 (even though only one petitioner has filed the petition). A building named M/s Satyam Prasad Bhandar is constructed
The High Court cannot entertain a writ petition under Article 226 when an effective alternative remedy exists under the SARFAESI Act, emphasizing the need for exhaustion of statutory remedies.
The court reinforced that compliance with statutory notice requirements and fair valuation is essential in property auctions under the SARFAESI Act to protect borrower rights.
The right of redemption under the SARFAESI Act extinguishes upon publication of an auction notice, and guarantees against the actions of secured creditors must follow established procedures before in....
The right to redeem mortgaged property under the SARFAESI Act is extinguished once the auction notice is published, indicating no entitlement to challenge the sale thereafter.
Auction sale under SARFAESI Act upheld; simultaneous civil proceedings do not invalidate the completed transaction, and allegations of undervaluation found unsubstantiated.
Mandatory compliance with procedural requirements under the SARFAESI Act is essential; failure to adhere prejudices borrowers' rights and invalidates auction proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Rule 9(4) and 9(5) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, highlighting the requirement for the purchaser to pay ....
though existence of an alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, but a writ petition can be entertained in exceptional....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
