##PAGE1##

A.F.R.

Neutral Citation No. -

2026:AHC-LKO:80567 Reserved on: 06.10.2026 Delivered on: 05.11.2026 HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 1004411 of 2011 Smt. Rama Chaurasia W/o Shri Prakash Chaurasia …..Petitioner(s)

Versus Debut Recovery Appellant Tribunal Thro. its Registrar and 2 or …..Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ravi Singh, Ravendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Alok Saxena, Devi Prasad Maurya, Jagdish Prasad Maurya, Ram Raj, Rama Kant Srivastava, Sandeep Kumar, Vinay Shankar Srivastava Court No. - 4 HON'BLE IRSHAD ALI, J.

1) Heard Sri Ravi Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Shiv Ganesh Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 – State, Sri Alok Saxena, learned counsel for respondent No.2 – Bank and Sri J.P. Maurya, learned counsel for respondent No.3 – auction purchaser.

2) The present writ petition has been filed on following prayer(s):

“i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 18/07/2011 passed by Debut Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad i.e. opposite party no.1 contained as Annexure No.1 to the present writ petition.

ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to give effect of the impugned order dated 18/07/2011 passed by

Debut Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad i.e.

opposite party no.1 contained as Annexure No.1 to the

present writ petition.

iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of

mandamus commanding the opposite party no.2 accept the

loan amount and handover the land in question alongwith the paper book to the petitioner.

iv) issue such other order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly also be passed in favour of the petitioner.

v) Cost of the writ petition may also be awarded to the petitioner.”

3) By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the appellate order dated 18.07.2011 passed by the opposite party no.1, whereby the order dated 17.08.2010 passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow, in Securitisation Application No.SA-137 of 2007 was set aside and the appeal preferred by the respondent Bank was allowed. The petitioner has assailed the appellate order on the grounds, inter alia, that the Appellate Tribunal failed to consider the agricultural nature of the land in question, the alleged non-service of statutory notices under Sections 13(2) and 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the “SARFAESI Act”) and the deposit of the entire auction amount by the petitioner before issuance of the sale certificate. The petitioner has also alleged that the Bank arbitrarily returned the bank drafts deposited by her despite her willingness to discharge the outstanding liability.

4) According to the petitioner, she and Smt. Kiran Chaurasia are joint owners of the land in dispute, which they purchased through a registered sale deed dated 27.02.1987. The petitioner has asserted that the land was purchased for agricultural purposes and that its agricultural character continued to be reflected in the relevant revenue records.

5) The petitioner has stated that a partnership firm, namely, M/s Chaurasia Traders, was being run and controlled by two partners, namely, Shri Dhruv Prakash Chaurasia, stated to be the brother-in-law of the petitioner’s husband in the relationship described in the petition and Shri Ashok Kumar Chaurasia, also related to the petitioner’s husband.

The said firm obtained a credit loan of approximately Rs.30 lakh from the opposite party no.2 - Bank in the year 2003.

6) The petitioner has further stated that, at the time of sanctioning the aforesaid loan, her land in question was mortgaged with the Bank as security for the loan facility extended to M/s Chaurasia Traders. Accordi