The auction purchaser is bound by disclosed conditions; failure to inquire about dues prior to purchase bars relief claims.

JUDGMENT :

Swarupama Chaturvedi, J.

1. Heard Shri Mohd Sauood, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Pankaj Srivastava, learned panel counsel for the respondent no.3, and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the Petitioner, who is an auction purchaser, seeking directions against Respondents in relation to the water supply problem, which was discovered post-sale in respect of a property purchased through SARFAESI e-auction. The grievance of the Petitioner is that there is significant liability in terms of society dues, which had accrued under the account of the previous owner and that was neither disclosed by the Bank at the time of auction, nor was known to the Petitioner prior to taking possession. The main contention of the petitioner is that such liability was not reflected in any encumbrance certificate and therefore he has approached the Court for following relief:

“i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.4 to restore/resume water supply to the petitioner's Flat No. G-11 First Floor Saptrishi Apartment, Sector 16B, Pandit Deen Dayal Uyadhyay Puram, Agra. Sikandra Yojna, District Agra.

ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.4 to realize the dues if any from the respondent no.3.”

3. The fact of the matter is that the petitioner and his son were declared highest bidder for the flat and subsequently, certificate of sale dated 06.04.2024 was issued by the respondent no.3, Bank in favour of the petitioner and his son. The property in question was put to auction by the respondent no. 3, Bank as per the published sale notice dated 06.12.2023 for E-Auction under the SARFAESI.

4. After execution of the sale deed, the petitioner took the possession of the flat in question, where he noticed that the water supply was disconnected and hence the petitioner sent letters dated 28.03.2024 and 13.05.2024 to respondent no.4, which is the resident welfare society with a request to restore the water supply.

5. The petitioner had also sent a representation dated 14.10.2024 to the respondent no.3 Bank stating that in the auction that no society dues were declared neither mentioned in the sale letter, to which the respondent no.3 replied that the Bank sold the property on "as is where is”, “as is what is" and "whatever there is" through E-Auction dated 27.12.2023, nor the RWA (Society) of Saptrishi Apartment conveyed about the dues of the Society before the auction and as such he could not be intimated about the dues of the society and further it has been stated by the respondent Bank that the Bank is not liable to pay any dues of the society.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has also sent representation dated 15.10.2024 and 27.11.2024 to the Sub-Registrar, Registrar of Societies and Chits, Agra stating therein that after taking possession and registry, he had noticed that water supply to the flat in question was disconnected and inspite of repeated request, the same had not been restored and as such he could not have been deprived of basic needs. It is further submitted that the petitioner was not informed about the society dues when he enquired about liabilities.

7. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, neither the respondent-Bank obtained no dues certificate, nor had made any application for grant of “No Dues Certificate” prior to executing the registered deed under the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Apartment (Promotion of Construction Ownership and and Maintenance) Act, 2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argues that it was incumbent upon the res