IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed that a confirmed auction purchaser's rights are protected under Article 300-A, and arbitrary refusal to accept payment violates these rights.

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr.Praveen Kumar Dubey, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.Podila Hari Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.

2. PRAYER:

The petitioner approached the court seeking prayer as under:

“To issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the Nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent bank in not receiving the balance sale consideration amount paid by petitioner, as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and in violation of the Petitioner’s fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 300-A of Constitution of India.”

3. PERUSED THE RECORD:

(a) The order dated 15.11.2022 passed by the Court in the present W.P.No. 16587 of 2019, is as under:

“No representation for the respondent.

The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner of house bearing H.No. 4-49-128/11/B, on Plot No. 20A/Part (East Side Portion) admeasuring 106.875 Sq.yards with a plinth area of 660 sq. feet in Sy.No. 125, Kalpana Housing Society, Quthubullapur Village, Quthubullapur Mandal and Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same in Court auction vide sale certificate issued by the Senior Civil Judge, Medchal, by depositing an amount of Rs.40,30,000/- towards sale consideration. The sale was held by public auction on 06.04.2018 and the total sale consideration was paid by the petitioner to the credit of EP.No. 62 of 2015 in OS No. 13 of 2014 and the sale has been confirmed by the Court.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, even after satisfying the claim of the decree holder in EP No. 62 of 2015, a sum of more than Rs.18,00,000/- is lying to the credit of EP NO. 62 of 2015 and the respondent can as well approach the Senior Civil Judge, Medchal and receive the debt amount, allegedly, payable by the judgment debtor/predecessor-in-title of the petitioner.

As there is no contest from the respondent and counter is not filed, there shall be interim direction to the respondent to receive the balance amount, if any, lying to the credit of EP No. 62 of 2015 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Medchal.”

(b) The Counter affidavit has been filed by the Respondent, in particular, paragraph Nos. 2, 3 and 4, reads as under:

(2) I humbly submit that the petition under reply is not maintainable either in law or on facts of the case. The Petitioners have invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the Hon'ble High Court without availing the alternative remedy available under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, having been she questioned the action of the Respondent initiate under SARFAESI Act. Admittedly the Respondent took the physical possession of subject matter property by issuing Possession Notice dated 26-10-2018 wherein it has been clearly mentioned the amount due from borrowers Mr. Nampally Krishna and Mrs. Nampally Parijata and issuance of demand notice dated 09-12-2017 by claiming Rs.17,64,689.64/- as on 09-12-2017 with future interest. There is no dispute with regard to sanction of loan to borrowers in the matter and their default in repaying the same to the Respondent and declaring the account as NPA to proceed further under SARFAESI Act.

(3) It is pertinent to submit that the borrowers (Mr. Nampally Krishna & Mrs. Nampally Parijata) availed credit facility of Rs.15,95,000/- under Griha Prakash Scheme from Respondent on 30-07-2011 to purchase of readymade house and the same property is mortgaged by them by depositing its original Title Deed of Registered Sale Deed Document No. 8189/2011 dated 26-08-2011 including its original link documents with the Respondent in terms of a security to due repayment of said loan amount. Accordingly, the borrowers have executed all necessary loan documents in favour of Respondent. The borrowers should repay said loan amount to the Respondent in 120 Equated Monthly Installments of Rs.21,211/- per month but they failed to pay the same as per the terms and conditions of loan agreement and become defaulters. Consequently the subject